Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco Efficient Concrete Pacheco Torgal All Chapter

Use of recycled plastics in eco-efficient
concrete Pacheco-Torgal
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/use-of-recycled-plastics-in-eco-efficient-concrete-pac
heco-torgal/
Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efficient
Concrete
This page intentionally left blank
Woodhead Publishing Series in Civil and
Structural Engineering
Use of Recycled Plastics in

Eco-efficient Concrete
Edited by
Fernando Pacheco-Torgal
Jamal Khatib
Francesco Colangelo
Rabin Tuladhar
Woodhead Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier
The Officers’ Mess Business Centre, Royston Road, Duxford, CB22 4QH, United Kingdom
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek
permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our
arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright
Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by
the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and
experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices,
or medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in
evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described
herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and
the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors,
assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of
products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods,
products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-0-08-102676-2
For information on all Woodhead publications visit our

website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals
Publisher: Matthew Deans

Acquisition Editor: Gwen Jones
Editorial Project Manager: Charlotte Rowley
Production Project Manager: Joy Christel Neumarin Honest Thangiah
Designer: Mark Rogers
Typeset by TNQ Technologies
Contents
List of contributors xi
1 Introduction to the use of recycled plastics in eco-efficient concrete 1

F. Pacheco-Torgal
1.1 The waste plastic problem 1
1.2 Outline of the book 4
References 7
2 Techniques for separation of plastic wastes 9

Silvia Serranti and Giuseppe Bonifazi
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Plastic waste sources and typologies 10
2.3 The plastic recycling chain 13
2.4 Plastic waste separation technologies 15
2.5 Recycled plastics quality control 28
2.6 Technical challenges in plastic recycling 30
References 33
3 Hydraulic separation of plastic wastes 39

Monica Moroni, Emanuela Lupo and Floriana La Marca
3.1 Introduction 39
3.2 Principles of the hydraulic separation process 40
3.3 Devices for the hydraulic separation within mechanical recycling
plants 46
3.4 The hydraulic separator channel 48
3.5 Separation efficacy of the hydraulic separator channel 54
3.6 Conclusions 65
References 66
4 Production of recycled polypropylene (PP) fibers from industrial

plastic waste through melt spinning process 69
Rabin Tuladhar and Shi Yin
4.1 Introduction 69
4.2 Physical cutting of waste plastic 70
4.3 Mechanical recycling of plastic wastes 71
4.4 Production of recycled plastic fibers 75
vi Contents
4.5 Material characterization 77

4.6 Mechanical properties of recycled PP fibers 80
4.7 Conclusions 82
Acknowledgments 83
References 83
5 Fresh properties of concrete containing plastic aggregate 85

Sheelan M. Hama and Nahla N. Hilal
5.1 Introduction 85
5.2 Mix proportion and design 85
5.3 Workability of fresh concrete containing plastic aggregate 94
5.4 Fresh density of concrete containing plastic aggregate 101
5.5 Self-compacting plastic aggregate concrete 103
5.6 Conclusions 113
References 113
Further reading 114
6 Mechanical strength of concrete with PVC aggregates 115

A.A. Mohammed
6.1 Introduction 115
6.2 Properties of concrete with PVC waste aggregate 117
6.3 Summary 134
References 134
7 Characteristics of concrete containing EPS 137

J.M. Khatib, B.A. Herki and A. Elkordi
7.2 Preparation of EPS 139
7.3 Physical properties of EPS 140
7.4 Chemical properties of EPS 141
7.5 Substitution levels of EPS 141
7.6 Production and applications of EPS concrete 146
7.7 Density of concrete containing EPS 146
7.8 Fresh properties of concrete containing EPS 146
7.9 Mechanical properties 148
7.10 Thermal conductivity 153
7.11 Durability-related properties of concrete containing EPS 154
7.12 Structural performance of reinforced concrete beams 156
7.13 Conclusions and recommendations 156
References 158
8 Lightweight concrete with polyolefins as aggregates 167

Francesco Colangelo and Ilenia Farina
8.2 Production of expanded granules 168
8.3 Use of recycled polyolefins in different sectors 170
Contents vii
8.4 Use of polyolefins as recycled aggregates in lightweight concrete

(case study) 170
8.5 Future trends 183
References 183
Further reading 186
9 Properties of concrete with plastic polypropylene aggregates 189

Z. Pavlík, M. Pavlíkov
a and M. Z
aleska
9.2 Waste polypropylene-based aggregates for concrete 191
9.3 Structural properties of concrete with PP aggregates 197
9.4 Mechanical properties of concrete with PP aggregates 199
9.5 Thermal properties of composites with PP aggregates 207
9.6 Hygric properties of composites with PP aggregates 210
9.7 Possible application of PP in concrete production and future trends 211
Acknowledgments 211
References 211
10 Virgin and waste polymer incorporated concrete mixes for

enhanced neutron radiation shielding characteristics 215
Santhosh M. Malkapur and Mattur C. Narasimhan
10.2 Neutron radiation and shielding 216
10.3 Use of hydrogenous aggregates and polymers in radiation
shielding 223
10.4 Use of virgin HDPE powder as partial replacement to sand 227
10.5 Properties of PISCC mixes in their fresh states 231
10.6 Neutron radiation shielding properties of polymer incorporated
concrete mixes 235
References 245
11 Performance of dioctyl terephthalate concrete 249

B. Şimşek, T. Uygunoglu, H. Korucu and M.M. Kocakerim
11.2 Dioctyl terephthalate concrete 251
11.3 Comparison of the polyethylene terephthalate and dioctyl
terephthalate concrete 257
11.4 Conclusions and recommendations 262
References 264
12 Recycling of PET in asphalt concrete 269

I. Aghayan and R. Khafajeh
12.2 Using PET waste as modifier in asphalt mixture 270
12.3 Conclusion 282
References 283
viii Contents
13 Recycling of different plastics in asphalt concrete 287

M.A. Dalhat, Khaleel Al-Adham and M.A. Habib
13.2 Polymer modification of asphalt and the need for plastic
recycling in asphalt concrete 288
13.3 Materials and methods 289
13.4 Results 293
13.6 Summary and conclusions 302
Acknowledgments 303
Conflict of interest 303
References 303
14 Replacement of stabilizers by recycling plastic in asphalt concrete 307

Goutham Sarang
14.2 Need for stabilization of asphalt concrete 308
14.3 Addition of plastic in asphalt concrete 314
14.4 Performance of asphalt concrete with plastics 315
14.5 Field investigations 317
14.6 Conclusion 318
References 318
15 The use of recycled plastic as partial replacement of bitumen

in asphalt concrete 327
Marta Vila-Cortavitarte, Pedro Lastra-Gonz alez,

Miguel Angel Calzada-Pérez and I. Indacoechea-Vega
15.2 Bitumen’s role in asphalt 328
15.3 Modification of asphalt mixtures with polymers 329
15.4 Modification of asphalt mixtures with polystyrene 332
15.5 General Conclusions 344
15.6 Future lines of study 345
References 346
16 Concrete reinforced with metalized plastic waste fibers 349

Ankur C. Bhogayata
16.2 Metalized postconsumer plastic wastes: challenges and issues
for management 349
16.3 Feasibility of MPW in concrete: outcomes from pilot studies 350
16.4 Role of MPW fibers in the workability and strength properties
of conventional concrete 355
16.5 Effect of MPW fibers on the deformation due to the axial
compression by modified concrete 360
Contents ix
16.6 Advantages and limitations of the usage of MPW in concrete 364

16.7 Important findings and concluding remarks 365
16.9 Sources of further information and advice 366
References 366
Further reading 367
17 Performance of concrete with PVC fibres 369

Senthil Kumar Kaliyavaradhan and Tung-Chai Ling
17.2 Performance of concrete with PVC fibres 370
17.3 Conclusions 383
17.4 Future research perspective 383
Acknowledgments 383
References 384
18 Recycled waste PET for sustainable fiber-reinforced concrete 387

Dora Foti
18.2 Use of PET in concrete 389
18.3 Tests (summary) and results 398
Acknowledgments 408
References 408
Further reading 410
19 Properties of recycled carpet fiber reinforced concrete 411

Hamid Reza Pakravan, Ali Asghar Asgharian Jeddi, Masoud Jamshidi,
Farnaz Memarian and Amir Masoud Saghafi
19.2 Carpet types and fiber recycling methods 412
19.3 Properties of recycled carpet fiber 415
19.4 Physical properties of concrete containing recycled carpet fiber 416
19.5 Durability-related properties of concrete containing recycled
carpet fiber 418
19.6 Mechanical properties of concrete containing recycled
carpet fiber 418
References 423
20 Performance of asphalt concrete with plastic fibres 427

Nura Usman and Mohd Idrus Mohd Masirin
20.2 Polyethylene terephthalate 428
20.3 The use of polyethylene terephthalate in asphalt mixture 428
x Contents
20.4 Recycled polyethylene terephthalate fiber 429

20.5 Characteristics of recycled PET fiber 430
20.6 Application of recycled PET fiber in asphalt mixture 431
20.7 Conclusion 437
References 438
21 Sustainability of using recycled plastic fiber in concrete 441

Rabin Tuladhar and Shi Yin
21.2 Sustainability in construction materials 442
21.3 Comprehensive LCA of recycled plastic fibers used for
reinforcing concrete 448
Acknowledgments 459
References 459
Index 461
List of contributors
I. Aghayan Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran

Khaleel Al-Adham Civil & Environmental Engineering Department, King Fahd
University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
Ali Asghar Asgharian Jeddi Textile Engineering Department, Amirkabir Univer-
sity of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Ankur C. Bhogayata Department of Civil Engineering Marwadi Education
Foundation’s Group of Institutions, Rajkot, India
Giuseppe Bonifazi Department of Chemical Engineering, Materials & Environ-
ment, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Miguel Angel Calzada-Pérez GCS Research Group, University of Cantabria,
Av. de los Castros 44, Santander, Spain
Francesco Colangelo Department of Engineering, University Parthenope of Naples,
Materials Science and Engineering Research GroupdMASERG, Centro Direzionale,
Is. C4, Naples, Italy
M.A. Dalhat Transportation and Traffic Engineering Department, College of
Engineering, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
A. Elkordi Faculty of Engineering, Beirut Arab University, Beirut, Lebanon
Ilenia Farina Department of Engineering, University Parthenope of Naples,
Materials Science and Engineering Research GroupdMASERG, Centro Direzionale,
Is. C4, Naples, Italy
Dora Foti Department of Civil Engineering Sciences and Architecture, Polytechnic
University of Bari, Bari, Italy
M.A. Habib Civil & Environmental Engineering Department, King Fahd University
of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
Sheelan M. Hama Department of Civil Engineering, University of Anbar, Ramadi,
Iraq
B.A. Herki Faculty of Engineering, Soran University, Erbil, Iraq
Nahla N. Hilal Department of Civil Engineering, University of Anbar, Ramadi, Iraq
xii List of contributors
I. Indacoechea-Vega GITECO Research Group, University of Cantabria, Av. de los

Castros 44, Santander, Spain
Masoud Jamshidi School of Chemical Engineering, Iran University of Science and
Technology (IUST), Tehran, Iran
Senthil Kumar Kaliyavaradhan Key Laboratory for Green and Advanced Civil
Engineering Materials and Application Technology of Hunan Province, College of
Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, China
R. Khafajeh Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran
J.M. Khatib Faculty of Engineering, Beirut Arab University, Beirut, Lebanon;
Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton,
United Kingdom
M.M. Kocakerim Department of Chemical Engineering, Çankırı Karatekin Univer-
sity, Uluyazı Campus, Çankırı, Turkey
H. Korucu Department of Chemical Engineering, Çankırı Karatekin University,
Uluyazı Campus, Çankırı, Turkey
Floriana La Marca DICMA-Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Pedro Lastra-Gonz alez GITECO Research Group, University of Cantabria, Av. de
los Castros 44, Santander, Spain
Tung-Chai Ling Key Laboratory for Green and Advanced Civil Engineering Mate-
rials and Application Technology of Hunan Province, College of Civil Engineering,
Hunan University, Changsha, China
Emanuela Lupo DICEA-Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Santhosh M. Malkapur Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering
and Technology, M.S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences, Bengaluru, India
Mohd Idrus Mohd Masirin Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Rarit Raja Johor, Malaysia
Farnaz Memarian Textile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of
Technology, Tehran, Iran
A.A. Mohammed Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering,
University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Iraq
Monica Moroni DICEA-Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Mattur C. Narasimhan Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of
Technology Karnataka (NITK) Surathkal, Mangalore, India
F. Pacheco-Torgal C-TAC Research Centre, University of Minho, Guimar~aes,
Portugal
List of contributors xiii
Hamid Reza Pakravan Textile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of

Technology, Tehran, Iran
Z. Pavlík Department of Materials Engineering and Chemistry, Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Pavlíkova Department of Materials Engineering and Chemistry, Faculty of Civil
Amir Masoud Saghafi Technical and Production Director, Savin Carpet Company,
Tehran, Iran
Goutham Sarang Assistant Professor (Senior), School of Mechanical and Building
Sciences (SMBS), Vellore Institute of Technology - Chennai Campus, Chennai, Tamil
Nadu, India
Silvia Serranti Department of Chemical Engineering, Materials & Environment,
Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
B. Şimşek Department of Chemical Engineering, Çankırı Karatekin University,
Uluyazı Campus, Çankırı, Turkey
Rabin Tuladhar Centre of Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science, Col-
lege of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia
Nura Usman Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Tun
Hussein Onn Malaysia, Rarit Raja Johor, Malaysia; Department of Civil Engineering,
Hassan Usman Katsina Polytechnic, Katsina, Nigeria
T. Uyguno
glu Department of Civil Engineering, Afyon Kocatepe University,
Ahmet Necdet Sezer Campus, Afyon, Turkey
Marta Vila-Cortavitarte GITECO Research Group, University of Cantabria, Av.
de los Castros 44, Santander, Spain
Shi Yin College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville,
QLD, Australia
M. Zalesk
a Department of Materials Engineering and Chemistry, Faculty of Civil
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction to the use of
recycled plastics in eco-efficient 1
concrete
F. Pacheco-Torgal
C-TAC Research Centre, University of Minho, Guimar~aes, Portugal
1.1 The waste plastic problem

Deriving from the Greek word ’’plastikos’’ meaning fit for moulding, plastics
comprise mainly two broad categories (thermoplastics and thermosetting plastics).
The former include plastics (polyethylene, polypropylene, polysterene, polycarbon-
ates, etc.) that can be heated up to form products and if needed can be reheated and
melted again for new forms. In contrast, the latter (polyurethane, polyesters,
phenolic and acrylic resins, silicone, etc.) can be melted and formed, but unlike ther-
moplastics cannot be remelted. The global production of fossil-based plastics has
grown more than 20-fold since 1964 to 322 million ton in 2015 (Wei and Zimmer-
mann, 2017; PlasticsEurope, 2017). Not only the production of plastics consumes
yearly 4%e8% of the global crude oil extraction meaning that if plastics are
disposed instead of being recycled, these resources are lost but the worst part is
that plastic waste is harmful because pigment contains many trace elements that
are highly toxic and need hundreds of years to degrade (Huysman et al., 2017).
More worrying is the several millions of tons of plastic waste that are entering the
ocean each year, for quite some time, whose damaging action has been addressed
by several authors (Eriksen et al., 2014; Jambeck et al., 2015; Sussarellu et al.,
2016; Green et al., 2016; MacArthur, 2017; Lamb et al., 2018). Between 8 and 24
tons of plastic waste enter oceans each minute (Haward, 2018).
According to ten Brink et al. (2018), the annual cost of marine litter is conserva-
tively estimated at US$ 40 billion. And in July 19, 2017 Science magazine published
an article warning that by 2050, we’ll have produced 26 billion tons of plastic waste,
half of which will be dumped in landfills and the environment (Guglielmi, 2017). It’s
then no surprise that target 14.1 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
seeks to prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular,
from land-based activities, including marine debris, by 2025. Yes, it’s true that on
17th of April 2018 a paper published in the Proceeding of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America (Austin et al., 2018) reported the discov-
ery of an enzyme that can digest highly crystalline PET and also polyethylene-2,5-
furandicarboxylate (PEF). However, as Oliver Jones, analytical chemist at RMIT
University in Melbourne, recognized “there is still a way to go before you could
recycle large amount of plastic with enzymes” (Gabbatiss, 2018). But a more wise
Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efficient Concrete. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102676-2.00001-3

2 Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efficient Concrete
position was made by Adisa Azapagic, at the University of Manchester who

mentioned that “A full life-cycle assessment would be needed to ensure the technol-
ogy does not solve one environmental problemdwastedat the expense of others,
including additional greenhouse gas emissions” (Carrington, 2018). And if a lesson
can be extracted from this case, it is that scientists should have some lessons on pub-
lic communication, a problem recognized several years ago (Soapbox Science, 2012;
Goldstein, 2012; Grant, 2016). In the meantime a study published on May of 2018
showed that each liter of sea ice on the Arctic contained around 12,000 particles of
plastic (La Daana et al., 2018). No wonder then that a previous study (Wilcox et al.,
2015) revealed that around 90% of seabirds have plastic waste particles in their gut
that they mistakenly took to be fish eggs. Also, Rochman (2018) recently showed
that the ocean is not the only place to suffer damaging environmental impacts.
Around 26 million tons of plastic waste are generated in Europe every year, which
makes Europe the second largest producer of plastic materials, being responsible for
20% of the world production. Packaging applications, the largest application sector,
represent 39.6% of the total plastic demand (Huysman et al., 2017). In the past years
significant share of European waste plastics leave the EU to be treated in third world
countries, where different environmental standards may apply (EUROSTAT,
EuropePlastics). However, since January of 2018 China decided to ban the imports
of 24 kinds of waste including waste plastic which will aggravate the problem of
plastic waste in Europe. And that is why plastic waste is one of the five priority areas
in the EU action plan for the circular economydCE (EC, 2015a). The CE concept
may have been inspired by Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and the “limits to growth”
thesis of the Club of Rome in the 1970s (Winans et al., 2017) and is being promoted
by the EU, but several national governments still argue (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017)
that the conceptual relationship between the CE and sustainability is not clear, hav-
ing detrimental implications for the advancement of sustainability science. Others
(Korhonen et al., 2018) mentioned that the CE practice has almost exclusively
been developed and led by practitioners, that is, policy-makers, businesses, business
consultants, business associations, and business foundations and as a result the
research content of the CE concept is superficial and unorganized.
Still in the European Union context, looking into the past is worth remembering that
the previous Directive 94/62/EC had imposed a recycling target which required 22.5%
of waste plastic packaging to be recycled. This target increased toward 55% by 2030
(EC, 2015b) but on March 14 of the 2017 the European Parliament voted for legisla-
tion to aim for a recycling rate target of 70% by 2030, with a proposed 80% target for
packaging materialsdincluding paper, cardboard, plastics, glass, metal, and wood.
This constitutes a high ambition postured by the EU and there is still some controversy
regarding job creation in the field of waste recycling. While the report cited by the Eu-
ropean Parliament mentioned the possibility of creation of 1e3 million jobs (IP, 2017)
the fact is that the European Commission has presented a much lower number of just
170,000 direct jobs (Politico, 2018). Most of these optimistic projections usually tend
to forget that as Cooper and Gutowski (2017) recently pointed the fact that reusing a
product does not guarantee an environmental benefit because of the need to upgrade
old product efficiencies and the fact that more efficient new products can be on the
Introduction to the use of recycled plastics in eco-efficient concrete 3
market. For instance, as contradicting as it may seem, Dunant et al. (2018) showed that
reused steel is somewhat more expensive than new steel elements. Fig 1.1 shows plas-
tic post-consumer waste rates of recycling, energy recovery, and landfill per country in
2016 and also the group of 10 countries that have implemented landfill restrictions.
The figure illustrates in a very clear way the effort that needs to be taken to close
the gap between the state-of-the-art plastic waste recycling and the new recycling tar-
gets. Of course energy recovery is nothing more than incineration (Eriksson and Finn-
veden, 2017).
Also the proof that the new and ambitious waste plastic recycling approved by the
European Parliament could be hard to achieve is given by Karl-H. Foerster, executive
director of industry organization Plastics Europe, who responded to the parliamentary
proposals, saying that: “Taking into account today’s recycling technology, we already
Figure 1.1 Plastic waste rates of recycling, energy recovery, and landfill per country (Plastics, 2017).
consider that the 55% plastics packaging preparing for re-use and recycling target pro-
posed by the Commission is challenging. We would therefore like to call on the Pres-
idency of the Council to carefully assess the impact prior to adopting any substantive
amendment to the rules on the calculation initially proposed by the Commission.” That
position however must be seen in the light of the interests of the associates of Plastics
Europe which are in the business of plastic manufacture and not in the business of
waste plastic recycling. Of course, some European countries like the Netherlands,
which in 2014 already recycled 50% of (packaging) plastics, aiming for 52% in
2022 (Gradus et al., 2017) will be in a better position to achieve this requirements.
Be there as it may, the truth is that even countries with top performance concerning
plastic waste recycling like Austria recognized that in order to achieve the proposed
increased target major steps will be needed with respect to both collection and sorting
of waste plastic (Van Eygen et al., 2018). This also means that even in Europe there’s
still much to do in order to aim at a 100% recycling target (zero plastic waste scenario).
In January 16 of 2018 the European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy was
released (COM, 2018). The document confirmed that more than 85% of plastic was
sent to China. The document mentions that internalizing the environmental costs of
landfilling and incineration through high or gradually rising fees or taxes could
improve the economics of plastic recycling. However, this is just wishful thinking
lacking a sound study. More likely it could constitute an incentive for illegal dumping
or for exportation of plastic wastes to Africa as was mentioned in a United Nations
University study (PiP, 2017) meaning that at this moment it is not possible to forecast
how increasing recycling targets and the use of internalizing the environmental costs
through rising fees or taxes may lead to an increase of smuggling waste to third world
countries. The concept of eco-efficiency was firstly coined in the book Changing
Course (Schmidheiny, 1992) in the context of 1992 Earth Summit process. This
concept includes "the development of products and services at competitive prices
that meet the needs of humankind with quality of life, while progressively reducing
their environmental impact and consumption of raw materials throughout their life cy-
cle, to a level compatible with the capacity of the planet.” All of these give an impor-
tant value to the option of recycling waste plastics through concrete, which is the most
consumed material in our planet, about 25 gigatonnes per year around 3.5 ton per
capita (Hossain et al., 2018). Not to mention the several billion tons of asphalt concrete
used by the pavement industry each year. The use of recycled plastics in eco-efficient
concrete can be done mainly by replacing natural aggregates, as binders and also as
recycled fibers, allowing for improvements in the ductility of concrete composites.
Those are the areas covered by this book.
1.2 Outline of the book

This book thus provides an updated state-of-the-art review on the use of recycled plas-
tics in eco-efficient concrete.
Part I encompasses processing of plastic wastes (Chapters 2e4).
Chapter 2 concerns techniques for the separation of plastic waste namely gravity
separation, electrostatic separation, magnetic density separation, flotation, and
sensor-based sorting. Auxiliary technologies usually found in plastic recycling plants
are also described: magnetic and Eddy current separators. The importance of recycled
plastic quality control and product certification is strongly pointed out, reporting both
traditional and advanced quality measurement techniques.
Chapter 3 discusses hydraulic separation of plastic waste. This chapter presents an
original device for the hydraulic separation of plastic polymers from mixtures. An
extensive experimental campaign was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of
the apparatus, using two geometric arrangements, nine hydraulic configurations, and
three selections of polymers at three stages of a material’s life cycle. Experimental
data were also employed to validate a numerical model developed within the frame-
work of Computation Fluid Dynamics. The separation results were evaluated in terms
of grade and recovery of a useful material.
Chapter 4 presents the case for the production of recycled plastic fibers. The pro-
duction process includes melt-spinning and hot-drawing processes, which increase
crystallinity of the plastic polymer fibers and improve its mechanical properties.
Part II concerns the case of concrete with recycled plastic as aggregate or binder
(Chapters 5e15).
Chapter 5 reviews the fresh properties of concrete with plastic aggregates. The
chapter also reviews the case for fresh properties of self-compacting concrete.
Chapter 6 covers mostly the mechanical strength of concrete with polyvinyl chlo-
ride (PVC) aggregates including compressive and tensile strength and modulus of
elasticity.
Chapter 7 provides a comprehensive review of concrete containing Expanded Poly-
styrene (EPS), covers recent research, including some recent research by the authors,
with some details on the compositions of concrete mixes, presentation, and discussion
of the results obtained. The review includes the influence of different amounts of EPS
as a replacement for natural aggregates on the different mechanical, physical, and dura-
bility properties of lightweight aggregate concretes (LWAC). The chapter also in-
cludes the methods and techniques for recycling waste EPS to be utilized in concrete.
Chapter 8 deals with the use of polyolefin waste aggregates (PWA) obtained from
recycled plastics and used as plastic aggregates to replace the natural ones to produce
lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC). The mechanical properties (compressive and
tensile strength) and physical properties (porosity, density, and thermal stability) are
determined. Furthermore, the postfire residual mechanical performance, ultrasonic
testing, and compression force are evaluated.
Chapter 9 is concerned with waste polypropylene-based aggregates, in terms of its
physical, mechanical, and hygric properties and, in particular, of thermal attributes and
optimum energy performance in building construction.
Chapter 10 addresses polymers for enhancing neutron radiation shielding of con-
crete. Past research in the field is reviewed. The feasibility issues and concerns while
using virgin and waste pulverized High-density polyethylene (HDPE) polymeric ma-
terials as partial replacement to fine aggregates for making concrete mixes with
enhanced neutron radiation shielding characteristics are discussed. The fresh and
hardened properties of these mixes and their effect on neutron radiation shielding are
also discussed.
Chapter 11 reviews the reuse of dioctyl terephthalate (DOTP) obtained from waste
PET into concrete. Fresh properties as well as mechanical properties of hardened con-
crete are reviewed, along with thermal conductivity. Performance comparisons be-
tween DOTP concrete and PET concrete are also reviewed.
Chapter 12 covers studies investigated in the usage of PET wastes in asphalt
mixture. The volume and mechanical properties of asphalt mixtures containing PET
wastes along with the physical characteristic of the PET-modified binder are examined.
Chapter 13 discloses results on a case study of asphalt concrete performance with
different plastic wastes. Mechanical properties and durability parameters are covered.
Emissions footprint is also covered.
Chapter 14 discusses the need of stabilization of asphalt concrete and different sta-
bilizer materials using recycling plastics. Suitable methods for incorporating waste
plastics, advantages of each, performance of waste plastic added mixtures are dis-
cussed in detail with brief information on some field evaluations.
Chapter 15 reviews the use of recycled plastic as partial replacement of bitumen in
asphalt concrete. The need for stabilization of asphalt concrete is reviewed. The per-
formance of asphalt concrete with plastics is also addressed.
Finally, Part III covers concrete with recycled plastic fibers (Chapters 16e22).
Chapter 16 surveys the usage of metalized plastic waste (MPW) as a cement con-
crete constituent in a macrofibrous form. The chapter focuses on how to obtain the op-
timum quantity of MPW fibers with a suitable size to be used in concrete and changes
in the deformation response due to the axial compression along with the evaluation of
preliminary material properties.
Chapter 17 addresses concrete with PVC fibers in the fresh and hardened state. It is
suggested that the use of PVC fibers, either 0.8% (by weight of cement) or 0.2% (by
volume of concrete), could significantly improve the performances of concrete. Lim-
itations and practical issues on the utilization of PVC fibers in concrete mixes are iden-
tified. Hence, recommendations and future research needs on the practical implications
of the use of PVC fibers are given at the end of the chapter.
Chapter 18 addresses the case of polymers added to concrete in the form of binder
or as discrete elements (fibers) or continuous (strips) can limit the presence of cracks
and especially avoid the corrosion processes in reinforced concrete structural elements.
In more detail, the effect of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) on concrete mix is espe-
cially considered. Laboratory results of concrete reinforced with PET fibers derived
from recycled water bottles and with different shapes are analyzed.
Chapter 19 presents an overview of physical and mechanical properties of concrete
containing recycled carpet waste fibers, as well as the carpet structure and fiber
properties.
Chapter 20 gives details of a case study on the performance of asphalt concrete rein-
forced with recycled PET fibers.
Chapter 21 closes Part III with a chapter on the life cycle assessment. The produc-
tion of 100% recycled polypropylene fibers is compared with the environmental im-
pacts of virgin PP fibers and steel reinforcing mesh.
References
Austin, H.P., Allen, M.D., Donohoe, B.S., Rorrer, N.A., Kearns, F.L., Silveira, R.L., et al., 2018.
Characterization and engineering of a plastic-degrading aromatic polyesterase. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences 201718804.
Carrington, D., 2018. Scientists Accidentally Create Mutant Enzyme that Eats Plastic Bottles.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/16/scientists-accidentally-create-
mutant-enzyme-that-eats-plastic-bottles.
COM, 2018. 28 Final. A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels,
16.1.2018. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/plastics-strategy.pdf.
Cooper, D.R., Gutowski, T.G., 2017. The environmental impacts of reuse: a review. Journal of
Industrial Ecology 21 (1), 38e56.
La Daana, K.K., Gårdfeldt, K., Lyashevska, O., Hassell€ov, M., Thompson, R.C., O’Connor, I.,
2018. Microplastics in sub-surface waters of the Arctic Central Basin. Marine Pollution
Bulletin 130, 8e18.
Dunant, C.F., Drewniok, M.P., Sansom, M., Corbey, S., Cullen, J.M., Allwood, J.M., 2018.
Options to make steel reuse profitable: an analysis of cost and risk distribution across the
UK construction value chain. Journal of Cleaner Production 183, 102e111.
EC, 2015a. Closing the Loop - an EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy. COM (2015) 614.
European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
EC, 2015b. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending
Directive 94/62/EC on Packaging and Packaging Waste. COM(2015) 596. European
Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
Eriksen, M., Lebreton, L.C., Carson, H.S., Thiel, M., Moore, C.J., Borerro, J.C., et al., 2014.
Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: more than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over
250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS One 9 (12), e111913.
Eriksson, O., Finnveden, G., 2017. Energy recovery from waste incinerationdthe importance of
technology data and system boundaries on CO2 emissions. Energies 10 (4), 539.
Gabbatiss, J., 2018. Plastic-eating Enzyme Accidentally Created by Scientists Could Help
Solve Pollution Crisis. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/plastic-eating-
enzyme-pollution-solution-waste-bottles-bacteria-portsmouth-a8307371.html.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M., Hultink, E.J., 2017. The circular economyea new
sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production 143, 757e768.
Goldstein, M., 2012. Pacific Plastic, Sea Skaters, and the Media: Behind the Scenes of My
Recent Paper. http://www.deepseanews.com/2012/05/pacific-plastic-sea-skaters-and-the-
media-behind-the-scenes-of-my-recent-paper/.
Gradus, R.H., Nillesen, P.H., Dijkgraaf, E., van Koppen, R.J., 2017. A cost-effectiveness
analysis for incineration or recycling of Dutch household plastic waste. Ecological Eco-
nomics 135, 22e28.
Grant, R., 2016. Why Scientists Are Losing the Fight to Communicate Science to the Public.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2016/aug/23/scientists-losing-
science-communication-skeptic-cox.
Green, D.S., Boots, B., O’Connor, N.E., Thompson, R., 2016. Microplastics affect the
ecological functioning of an important biogenic habitat. Environmental Science & Tech-
nology 51 (1), 68e77.
Guglielmi, G., 2017. In the next 30 years, we’ll make four times more plastic waste than we ever
have. Science. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/next-30-years-we-ll-make-four-
times-more-plastic-waste-we-ever-have.
Haward, M., 2018. Plastic pollution of the world’s seas and oceans as a contemporary challenge
in ocean governance. Nature Communications 9 (1), 667.
Hossain, M.U., Poon, C.S., Dong, Y.H., Xuan, D., 2018. Evaluation of environmental impact
distribution methods for supplementary cementitious materials. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 82, 597e608.
Huysman, S., De Schaepmeester, J., Ragaert, K., Dewulf, J., De Meester, S., 2017. Performance
indicators for a circular economy: a case study on post-industrial plastic waste. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling 120, 46e54.
IP, 2017. Towards a Circular Economy-Waste Management in the EU. IP/G/STOA/FWC/2013-
001/LOT 3/C3. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/581913/EPRS_
STU(2017)581913_EN.pdf.
Jambeck, J.R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T.R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., et al., 2015.
Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347 (6223), 768e771.
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., Sepp€al€a, J., 2018. Circular economy: the concept and its limita-
tions. Ecological Economics 143, 37e46.
Lamb, J.B., Willis, B.L., Fiorenza, E.A., Couch, C.S., Howard, R., Rader, D.N., et al., 2018.
Plastic waste associated with disease on coral reefs. Science 359 (6374), 460e462.
MacArthur, E., 2017. Beyond plastic waste. Science. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/358/
6365/843.
PiP, 2017. Person in the Port Project. United Nations University, Bonn. http://collections.unu.
edu/eserv/UNU:6349/PiP_Report.pdf.
Plastics, 2017. Plastics - the Facts. PlasticsEurope. Brusselse Association of Plastics Manu-
facturers, Brussels. https://www.plasticseurope.org/download_file/force/1055/181.
Politico, 2018. Hope for Circular Economy Jobs Could Be a Waste. https://www.politico.eu/
article/circular-economy-jobs-waste-garbage-trash-recycling/.
Rochman, C.M., 2018. Microplastics researchdfrom sink to source. Science 360 (6384),
28e29.
Soapbox Science, 2012. Reaching Out: Science Has a PR Problem. http://blogs.nature.com/
soapboxscience/2012/05/30/reaching-out-science-has-a-pr-problem.
Stephan Schmidheiny with BCSD, 1992. Changing Course: A Global Perspective on Devel-
opment and the Environment. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sussarellu, R., Suquet, M., Thomas, Y., Lambert, C., Fabioux, C., Pernet, M.E.J., et al., 2016.
Oyster reproduction is affected by exposure to polystyrene microplastics. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences 113 (9), 2430e2435.
ten Brink, P., et al., 2018. Circular Economy Measures to Keep Plastics and Their Value in the
Economy, Avoid Waste and Reduce Marine Litter. Economics Discussion Papers, No.
2018-3. Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW), Kiel.
Van Eygen, E., Laner, D., Fellner, J., 2018. Circular economy of plastic packaging: current
practice and perspectives in Austria. Waste Management 72, 55e64.
Wei, R., Zimmermann, W., 2017. Biocatalysis as a green route for recycling the recalcitrant
plastic polyethylene terephthalate. Microbial Biotechnology 10, 1302e1307.
Wilcox, C., Van Sebille, E., Hardesty, B.D., 2015. Threat of plastic pollution to seabirds is
global, pervasive, and increasing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112
(38), 11899e11904.
Winans, K., Kendall, A., Deng, H., 2017. The history and current applications of the circular
economy concept. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 68, 825e833.
Techniques for separation of
plastic wastes 2
Silvia Serranti, Giuseppe Bonifazi
Department of Chemical Engineering, Materials & Environment, Sapienza University of
Rome, Rome, Italy
2.1 Introduction
Mechanical recycling, which is the processing of waste by physical means, represents
the main approach to follow in order to recover plastics. This process typically
includes different actions, such as collection, screening, manual and/or automatic
sorting, size reduction, washing, extrusion, and granulation that may occur in different
sequences and more than one at a time, according to the characteristics of the feed plas-
tic waste, in terms of origin, size, shape, and composition (Hopewell et al., 2009;
Ragaert et al., 2017).
Foundation of each mechanical process, finalized to separate a specific material
inside a flow stream containing other materials also, is to know the different properties
of the target material, with respect to the actions to be applied (i.e., comminution,
classification, separation). Important material properties useful to select the best
separation strategies for segregation of plastic waste include: particle size, class
distribution, density, magnetic and electric properties, color, shape, etc. Density
usually represents one of the most utilized properties to perform material separation.
Unfortunately, some polymers are characterized by very close values of density
(Al-Salem et al., 2009); in these cases this property cannot be successfully utilized,
especially to obtain high-quality single polymer streams.
The need of powerful technologies to perform plastic waste separation, being at the
same time cost-effective and able to guarantee high quality of products in terms of pu-
rity is more and more stringent in order to produce secondary plastics that are compet-
itive in the market in comparison with the virgin polymers. In fact, the actual economic
and environmental constraints dramatically increase the interest of many players (i.e.,
industries, recyclers, technology developers, engineers, etc.) both in waste-sorting
technologies, for the production of high-quality secondary polymers, and in devel-
oping automatic sensors for quality assessment of waste-derived secondary polymers.
On December 2015 plastic was in fact identified by the European Commission as a key
priority in the “EU Action Plan for a circular economy” (COM, 2015) and in January
2018 a “European strategy for plastics in a circular economy” (COM, 2018) was
adopted in order to use such a resource in a more sustainable way, including measures
for the improvement in plastic sorting and recycling capacity and in quality of recycled
plastics.
Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efficient Concrete. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102676-2.00002-5

A mechanical process aimed to perform plastic waste recycling is based on the uti-
lization of fast, accurate, and reliable tools and equipment specifically addressed to
separate and recover single polymer streams, eliminating polluting elements (i.e., other
polymers or other materials) present in the feed. As already stated, recycling plant
layout has to be developed and managed taking into account the different polymers
in the feed as well as the presence of other materials, both aspects in relation to the
plastic waste sources (Ignatyev et al., 2014), that is: virgin and used ones. The
polymer-based products that belong to the first source class (i.e., virgin waste) never
reached the consumer (i.e., runners from injection molding, waste from production,
changeovers, fall-out products, cuttings, and trimmings). These start-of-life plastic
wastes are usually uncontaminated both from other polymers and/or nonpolymers.
Obviously, they represent the higher-quality grades of polymer waste. End-of-life plas-
tic wastes belong to the second source class (i.e., postconsumer waste). These latter can
strongly vary both in quantity and in quality according to the collecting source and/or
the adopted collecting strategies.
Mechanical recycling can be applied to plastic waste sorting following two different
approaches, that is, at macro- or microscale.
Plastic macrosorting is usually performed when the waste flow stream contains the
polymers to be recovered as macroobjects easy to be identified and separated. In this
case, any specific mechanical action (i.e., size reduction/screening) has to be prelimi-
nary applied and waste plastics, usually bottles and containers, are separated. Specific
polymer attributes are first detected by specialized sensing devices and according to
their characteristics further separated, usually following air-blowebased strategies.
Manual separation strategies are also applied and human knowledge is at the base
of the separation, It is a labor-intensive, costly, and inefficient option, even if today
plastic containers are labeled according to the constituting polymer and/or blend of
polymers.
Plastic microsorting is usually applied when waste plastics are recovered as flakes,
that is, individuals resulting from milling actions, inside a flow stream of mixed waste
characterized by different physical chemical attributes. In this case, handling costs
decrease and the quantity of waste strongly increases, but more complex, and often
also sophisticated technologies have to be designed, implemented, set up, and applied.
These technologies (e.g., size reduction, screening, separation, etc.) are usually
sequentially applied. In the latter case, sorting units and related logics, both addressed
to separation and/or recovered polymer flow stream quality assessment play a preem-
inent role.
2.2 Plastic waste sources and typologies

2.2.1 Production of plastic waste
Over the last 50 years the role and importance of plastics in our economy have grown
steadily. World plastic production has increased twentyfold compared to the 1960s
reaching 335 million tonnes in 2016 (Plastics the Facts, 2017), and should double
in the next 20 years. In the EU, plastic production reached 60 million tonnes in
Techniques for separation of plastic wastes 11
2016. The largest plastic producers are China (29%), followed by Europe (19%) and
NAFTA (18%).
Despite the global increase in plastic production, the potential for recycling plastic
waste is still largely unexploited. The reuse and recycling of plastic at the end of life
are very low, especially compared to other materials such as paper, glass, and metal.
The European plastics converter demand by segment in 2016 is reported in Fig. 2.1,
showing that the packaging sector accounts for 39.9%, followed by building and con-
struction (19.7%); automotive (10%); electrical and electronic equipment (6.2%);
household, leisure, and sports (4.2%), agriculture (3.3%). Other sectors, including ap-
pliances, mechanical engineering, furniture, medical, etc., account for the remaining
16.7% (Plastics The Facts, 2017).
In Fig. 2.2 the European distribution of plastic waste generation by segment in 2015
is reported. It is evident that the main source of plastic waste is packaging, accounting
for 59% of the total plastic waste. It can be noticed that from production to waste,
different plastic products are characterized by different life cycles, depending on their
use, for example, plastic packaging has a service life of less than 1 year, plastic for in-
dustrial equipment can have a service life of 40 years or more. That is the reason why
the volume of collected plastic waste in 1 year usually does not match the volume of
plastic production.
About 27.1 million tonnes of plastic waste were collected in Europe in 2016
(Plastics The Facts, 2017), of which 31.1% was collected for recycling, 41.6% for
energy recovery and 27.3% still went to landfill. Even if the percentage of recycled
plastics is quite low, a positive aspect is that in the past 10 years (from 2006 to
2016) plastic waste recycling has increased by 79% and landfill has decreased by
43%. Unfortunately, even if the EU situation is improving, in many countries landfill
is still the first or second option for plastic waste.
Concerning plastic packaging waste treatment, in 2016 recycling was the first
option accounting for 40.9%, followed by energy recovery (38.8%) and landfill
(20.3%).
Plastic demand by different market sectors (%)

Packaging 39.90%
Building &
construction 19.70%
Automotive 10.00%
Electrical & electronic

6.20%
Household, leisure &

sports 4.20%
Agriculture 3.30%
Others 16.70%
Figure 2.1 Plastic demand by different market sectors in 2016.

Plastics The Facts, 2017.
EU plastic waste generation (%)

Others 14.00%
Agriculture 5.00%
Non packaging
household 4.00%
Electrical & electronic

8.00%
Packaging 59.00%
Automotive 5.00%
Building & construction

5.00%
Figure 2.2 EU plastic waste generation in 2015.

COM, 2018. A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. p. 28.
It was estimated that plastic production and the incineration of plastic waste
generate a total of about 400 million tonnes of CO2 per year (Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, 2016). Increased use of recycled plastics can reduce dependence on fossil
fuel extraction for plastic production and contain CO2 emissions. According to esti-
mates (Rahimi and García, 2017), recycling of plastic waste from around the world
could result in annual energy savings of 3.5 billion barrels of oil.
Alternative types of raw materials are also being developed (for example, bio-based
plastics or plastics produced from carbon dioxide or methane), which offer the same
functionalities of traditional plastics with a potentially lower environmental impact,
but currently represent a very small slice of the market.
Very large quantities of plastic waste, generated both on land and at sea, are
dispersed in the environment, causing considerable economic and environmental dam-
age. Worldwide, between 5 and 13 million tonnes of plastics end up in the oceans each
year, representing between 1.5% and 4% of the world production of this material
(Jambeck et al., 2015). Plastic is estimated to account for over 80% of marine litter.
The plastic residues are transported by sea currents, sometimes even for very long dis-
tances, and can be deposited on land, break up into microplastics, or form dense areas
trapped in oceanic gyres.
The phenomenon is accentuated by the increasing amount of plastic waste gener-
ated every year, also due to the growing diffusion of “single-use” plastic products,
for example, packaging or other consumer products thrown away after only one short
use, rarely recycled, and subject to being dispersed in the environment. These products
include small packaging, bags, disposable cups, lids, straws, and cutlery, in which the
plastic is widely used for its lightness, low costs, and practical features.
New sources of plastic dispersion are also increasing, generating further potential
risks to the environment and human health. Microplastics, defined as tiny plastic frag-
ments smaller than 5 mm, accumulate in the sea, where, due to their small size, they
can be easily ingested by marine fauna, and can also enter the food chain. Recent
studies have found the presence of microplastics in the air, in drinking water, and in
foods, and their impact on human health is still unknown.
Furthermore, the increase in the market share of plastics with biodegradable prop-
erties creates new opportunities but also generates risks. In the absence of a clear
labeling for consumers and without proper collection and processing of waste, it could
lead to an increase in the dispersion of plastics and create problems for mechanical
recycling. On the other hand, biodegradable plastics can certainly be useful for
some applications and innovation in this sector is welcomed.
2.2.2 Typologies of polymers, characteristics, and uses

The term “plastic” is derived from the Greek word “plastikos,” meaning fit for
moulding. This refers to the material’s malleability or plasticity during manufacture,
which allows it to be cast, pressed, or extruded into a variety of shapesdsuch as films,
fibers, plates, tubes, bottles, boxes, and much more. There are two categories of plas-
tics: thermoplastics and thermosets. Thermoplastics can be melted when heated and
hardened when cooled, the process is reversible. Due to their characteristics, they
can be reheated, reshaped, and frozen many times Thermoplastics include polyeth-
ylene terephthalate (PET), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polyvinyl chloride
(PVC), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polypropylene (PP), and polystyrene
(PS) among others. On the contrary, thermosets undergo a chemical change when heat-
ed, so they cannot be remelted and reshaped. Thermosets are widely used in electronics
and automotive products. Thermoset plastics include epoxy, polyester, melamine,
phenol formaldehyde, vulcanized rubber, silicone, polyurethane (PUR), etc.
Each plastic is identified by a resin code that was introduced to facilitate recycling
operations (ASTM, 2014). In Table 2.1 a list of the main plastic types, with their
typical applications, is reported.
The most diffused polymers, according to plastic converter demand, are (Fig. 2.3):
PP, LDPE, HDPE, PVC, PUR, PET, and PS. Such polymers are also the most abun-
dant in plastic waste with some variations according to different lifespan of products.
Polyethylene (LDPE and HDPE) is the most abundant polymer in plastic waste, due to
their dominance in packaging applications, followed by PP, forming together the
polyolefin family, accounting for 56.1% of plastic production demand. Other poly-
mers, accounting for 19.3% of the total, are mainly represented by acrylonitrile buta-
diene styrene (ABS), polycarbonate (PC), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA),
polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), utilized in many
different fields, such as medical, electronics, aerospace, etc.
2.3 The plastic recycling chain

The plastic recycling chain can be divided in the following operations:
Manual Material/ Size Extrusion &

Collection sorting Screening polymer reduction Washing granulation
sorting
Table 2.1 Main plastic types and their typical applications

Resin
code Polymer name Applications
Polyethylene Terephthalate Drink bottles, detergent bottles, clear

film for packaging, food trays,
carpet fibers
High-Density Polyethylene Detergent bottles, mobile components,
agricultural pipes, pallets, toys
Polyvinyl Chloride Packaging for food, medical materials,

pipes, window frames, cable
insulation
Low-Density Polyethylene Foil and films for dry cleaning, bread,
frozen food, fresh produce and
household garbage, toys, squeezable
bottles
Polypropylene Containers for food, medicine bottles,
bottle caps, bins, automobile
applications
Polystyrene Disposable cutlery, cups and plates,
meat trays, protective packaging for
furniture, electronic items and toys
Other. Use of this code indicates that a Other packaging
package is made with a resin other
than the six listed above, or is made
of more than one resin and used in a
multilayer combination.
European plastics demand by polymer types

19.3% 19.3%
17.5%
12.3%
10.0%
7.4% 7.5%
6.7%
PS PET PUR PVC HDPE LDPE PP Others
Figure 2.3 European plastics converter demand by polymer types in 2016.

Plastics The Facts, 2017.
Each step of the chain affects the others. For example, the selection of the sorting
technology will depend on the characteristics of collected plastic waste (types,
composition, etc.) and the final destination of the recovered product will depend
on its quality.
Collection is carried out adopting different systems, depending also on the different
sources, such as plastics from household waste and from industrial waste. Collection
can be, for example, monomaterial, if plastic is collected as source-separated fraction,
or multimaterial, if plastic is collected with other packaging materials (aluminum,
glass, etc.).
Manual sorting is usually necessary at the beginning of the recycling process for the
preliminary removal of films, cardboard, and bulky items and is usually carried out by
operators checking the waste stream on the conveyor belt.
Screening is applied to remove small objects such as glass and stones. Typical
screening equipment are drum or vibrating screens. Usually waste is divided into three
fractions: undersize (<50 mm), middle size (from 50 to 300 mm), and oversize
(>300 mm). Usually plastic is concentrated in the middle size fraction.
Material/Polymer Sorting has the aim to obtain high-quality recycled plastic
products, preferably single polymer stream. Sorting technologies are based on
different physical-chemical properties of waste materials, such as shape, density,
size, color, or chemical composition of objects. Material sorting consists in the
removal of the unwanted contaminants such as pieces of metals, glass, paper, etc.,
from the plastic waste stream. Polymer sorting is applied to separate polymers by
type; this step is of paramount importance in order to obtain high-quality single
polymer stream. The different plastic waste separation technologies are described
in Section 2.4.
Size reduction is usually carried out by shredding or cutting techniques; such oper-
ations can be present before or after the sorting step, depending on the plant layout and
on the typology of plastic waste stream. Plastics are usually shredded in flakes having a
size of 5e10 mm.
Extrusion and granulation: this step is necessary to produce a granulate which is
easier to use for converters than flakes. The polymer flakes are fed into the extruder,
are heated, and then forced through a die to form a continuous polymer product
(strand) which can then be cooled in a water bath before being pelletized. The granu-
lation process is used to reduce the strands to pellets which can then be used for the
manufacture of new products.
2.4 Plastic waste separation technologies

Plastic waste separation has the main aim to remove unwanted contaminants (such as
metals, glass, etc.) and to obtain high purity polymers. In the following sections the
different separation technologies usually adopted in plastic recycling plants are
described. The choice of the technology (or combination of more than one technology)
will depend on the feed characteristics and on the quality requirements for the output
products, for example, single polymer stream or mixed polymer stream.
2.4.1 Gravity separation

2.4.1.1 Dry
Air classifier
Air classifiers use air as the medium to separate lighter materials from heavier ones.
The waste stream enters the column with a raising current of air and lighter objects
are blown upward whereas heavier ones are dropped down (Fig. 2.4). Air classifiers
are usually utilized to remove light contaminants such as dust, small foam particles,
paper, glass powders, and polymer foils from the main plastic waste stream. To reach
this goal, aspirators, wind sifters of air-cyclonesebased techniques are utilized. The
separation occurs based on the different behavior of particles when subjected to a
stream of air. Even if the separation principle is quite simple, air-based classification
has to take into account different parameters (i.e., particle density, morphological
and morphometrical characteristics) that interact with single polymer terminal veloc-
ity, thus affecting separation efficiency and corresponding operative setup (Shapiro
and Galperin, 2005). Air classifiers can be utilized after a gravity separation step or
at the beginning of the process before or after a preliminary comminution stage, to
properly handle/separate complex plastic-rich parts from end-of-life durables (e.g.,
automotive-derived parts, electrical and electronic devices, appliances, etc.).
Ballistic separator
Ballistic separation is based on a simple principle, that is, the different movement char-
acteristics of particles of different size, shape, and weight, spatially defined as 2D or
3D structures (Christensen and Fruergaard, 2011). Ballistic separation can be success-
fully utilized both for mixed waste containing plastics and for plastic waste streams. In
the first case, film, paper, cardboard, textiles, and fibrous materials can be assigned to a
2D flat and light class of products; on the contrary, plastic containers, bottles, stone,
Light
Feed
Air stream
Heavy
Figure 2.4 Schematic representation of an air classifier.
wood, cans, and ferrous materials can be assigned to a 3D class of rolling and heavy
products. In the second case, films and flakes belong to 2D individual domains; on the
contrary, containers and/or crumpled containers belong to 3D individual domains. In
both cases separation occurs thanks to the utilization of a so-called ballistic separator,
or ballistic screen. Such a device is usually constituted by a series of screening paddles,
or perforated plates, whose number, size, and shape profile can vary according to the
feed rate and physical characteristics of the waste materials, affected by an orbital
motion and characterized by an inclined position, usually ranging from 10 degrees
to 20 degrees. The materials fed to this separator, according to their 2D or 3D structure
and physical characteristics (i.e., weight, morphological and morphometrical charac-
teristics) follow different trajectories with respect to the orbital blades movement.
The 2D and light materials are conveyed to the upper part of the ballistic separator,
whereas 3D, heavier, and “rolling” individuals move toward the lower part of the sepa-
rator. The continuous shaking of the waste produces also a screening effect: particles
characterized by a size smaller than the distance between the different screening pad-
dles pass through, generating a third flow stream.
2.4.1.2 Wet
Sink-float separation
Sink-float separation processes are based on the utilization of the different density
properties of materials. Separation is based on the fact that when materials are intro-
duced in a tank containing a fluid of a specific density, lighter materials will float
and heavier ones will sink (Fig. 2.5). A sink-float separation unit is efficient when
materials are characterized by quite different density values (Callister and Rethwisch,
2010). Therefore this method can be used to separate plastics from heavier materials,
or polymers characterized by different densities (i.e., PET from PP/PE or ABS from
Floating plastic flakes
Sinking plastic flakes
PP, HDPE, LDPE
Float PVC, PET, ABS

plastics with
specific gravity < 1 g/cm3
Water
Sink specific gravity =
plastics with 1 g/cm3
specific gravity < 1 g/cm3
Figure 2.5 Sink-float separation.

PS), whereas it cannot be utilized for separation of polymers characterized by quite

close density values, as for example polyolefins (PP, LDPE, HDPE). Presence of con-
taminants, air bubbles on polymer surface, polymer alteration, fillers, and additives can
affect separation efficiency.
Jigging
Jigging is one of the oldest methods of gravity concentration (Hori et al., 2009).
Jigging can be defined as an “enhanced gravity based separation” method: a water
stream is pulsed, or moved by pistons upward and downward, through the material
bed. Individuals are separated according to their densities, but also thanks to the sys-
tematic and repetitive applied pulsation, whose frequency and amplitude is strictly
related to physical, morphological, and morphometrical attributes of materials. With
reference to plastic waste, this procedure is quite efficient in many cases, allowing
to enhance polymer separation with respect to their relatively low density differences.
Thanks to the repetitions of these actions, particles stratify, across the bed height, ac-
cording to their specific density: the heaviest form the lowest layer and the lightest
constitute the highest.
Hydrocycloning
Hydrocycloning is a density sorting technology based on the centrifugal/centripetal
forces and fluid resistance of different particles having different characteristics
(Bradley, 1965).
A slurry is usually fed to the cyclone. A selected solid/liquid ratio and operative
pressure is adopted. As a result, the fluid pressure transfer produces, inside the device,
a rotational fluid motion, thus permitting separation among the different materials (i.e.,
polymer-contaminant or polymer-polymer characterized by different densities).
Lighter fractions will be transported to the upper part of the cyclone, the heavier
ones to the bottom (Fig. 2.6).
Light plastics
stream
Plastic waste
feed
Heavy plastics
stream
Figure 2.6 Plastic hydrocyclone separator.
Materials have to be properly milled before hydrocyclone-based sorting. The sep-

aration mechanism can be synthetically summarized as follows. The slurry is tangen-
tially fed to the inlet, causing the material to rotate within the vessel and ultimately to
form a vortex. Heavier materials are forced outward by centrifugal force and down
from the barrel section into the cone section. Materials heavier than fluid (i.e., usually
water) flow down the inner wall and exit through the apex; the lighter materials
sweep into the center vortex by inward fluid motion and are carried out to the outlet.
When hydrocyclones are selected, several factors have to be considered in order to
reach an optimal and efficient utilization: the need of relatively complex fluid-
dynamic circuits (i.e., presence of pumps, storage bins, pipes, valves, etc.) and the
need to perform a strict feed characteristics control (i.e., constancy of water/solids
ratio, polymers particle morphological and morphometrical characteristics, polymers
surface status).
2.4.2 Electrostatic separation

Electrostatic separation is usually applied when dielectric particles are handled.
Dielectric particles, when electrostatically charged, can be separated according to their
polarity charge (Reinsch et al., 2014). The electrostatic separation architecture is
commonly constituted by two electrodes: one positive and the other negative. Particle
charging conditions and modality are of paramount importance in this kind of separa-
tion. Plastic particles charging is usually carried out utilizing the triboelectric effect.
This effect is based on rubbing together plastic waste particles of different character-
istics; as a result they transfer their electrical charge and surfaces are thus affected by
different electrical charges allowing to perform separation inside an electric field
where also charged electrodes are present. For example, charged plastics falling
down freely in the area between two electrodes change their trajectory due to the mobi-
lized attractive/repulsive electrostatic forces and as a consequence can be “easily”
collected and separated (Fig. 2.7). This separation can be successfully applied with
reference to several polymers, according to the triboelectric charging sequence
(Dodbiba et al., 2001):
ðþ Þ ABS PP PC PET PS PE PVC PTFE ð Þ
When two plastics in this sequence are rubbed against each other, the plastic closer
to the positive end is charged positively and the one closer to the negative end is
charged negatively. For example, if PVC is rubbed against PET, PVC is charged nega-
tively and PET positively. On the contrary, when PET is rubbed against PP, PET is
charged positively and PP negatively.
Main disadvantages of this separation are linked to: (1) the operative conditions
(i.e., plastics and more in general the waste stream have to be dry), (2) particle
size and shape (i.e., particle surface characteristics and particle size affect the “char-
geability”), (3) presence of additives/fillers (Albrecht et al., 2011) and, finally, (4)
presence of dirtiness on particle surface that can change or inhibit particle surface
charging.
Plastics waste
Tribocharger
feed
Negatively charged particles
Positively charged particles
Positive Negative
electrode electrode
(+) (–)
Output products
Figure 2.7 Schematic representation of a triboelectric separation process.
2.4.3 Magnetic density separation

Magnetic density separation (MDS) is a density-based sorting process realized utiliz-
ing a “magnetic fluid” constituted by a liquid (i.e., water) and magnetic particles (i.e.,
iron oxide particles of about 10e20 nm) suspended in the liquid (Bakker et al., 2009).
Through a special magnetic field (Rem et al., 2013) an artificial gravity is produced, as
a magnetic force. Such a force varies exponentially in the vertical direction, and the
effective density of the liquid also varies accordingly in the same direction. The result
is that waste particles (i.e., plastic particles) will float in the liquid at a level where the
effective density is equal to their own density. In other words, particles characterized
by different densities are suspended at different heights (Hu et al., 2013). Adopting this
strategy, it is thus possible to separate plastic particles characterized by very close den-
sity values, such as PP and PE (Serranti et al., 2015) (Fig. 2.8) and PVC and rubber
from construction and demolition waste (Luciani et al., 2015). Particular care has to
be addressed to the correct fulfilling of the following fundamental steps: (1) wetting,
to make the polyolefin surface hydrophilic (Hu et al., 2010), (2) feeding, separating,
and collecting to avoid turbulence in the flow stream, before, during, and after the sep-
aration, negatively affecting particle flow inside the magnetic fluid.
Magnet
PP
Plastic waste Splitter
feed
PE
PP Ferro fluid
PE Mixing zone Separation zone Collection zone
Figure 2.8 Schematic representation of a magnetic density separation system for PP and PE.
Such technology is very useful to produce high-quality secondary raw materials,

that is, single polymer stream with a very low presence of impurities.
2.4.4 Flotation
Flotation processes are based on the different surface wettability properties of mate-
rials (Wang et al., 2015). In principle, flotation works very similarly to a sink and float
process, where the density characteristics of the materials, with respect to that of the
medium where they are placed are at the base of the separation. Sometimes a centrif-
ugal field is applied to enhance separation. Flotation works in a different way in the
sense that in a liquid medium, usually water, a “carrier” is introduced, air bubbles,
responsible to float hydrophobic particles that adhere to the bubbles with respect to
the hydrophilic ones that sink. According to surface plastic characteristics, this tech-
nique can be profitably applied, in principle, to separate waste polymers (Fraunholcz,
2004). To enhance or reduce plastic surface characteristics (i.e., hydrophobic or hydro-
philic) appropriate collectors, conditioners (Singh, 1998; Shen et al., 2002), and flota-
tion cell operative conditions (i.e., air flow rate, agitation) can be utilized. Usually
plastic flotation is carried out in alkaline conditions (Takoungsakdakun and
Pongstabodee, 2007). Once floated, hydrophobic polymers are recovered as well as
the sunk ones (i.e., hydrophilic) at the bottom of the cell. This technique, even if it
is well-known (Buchan and Yarar, 1995) and in principle quite powerful is not widely
used mainly for three reasons: (1) it is a wet technique, this means that water has to be
recovered and processed before reutilization, due to the presence of the reagents and
contaminants, (2) polymer surface status (i.e., presence of dirtiness/pollutants and/or
of physical/chemical alteration) can strongly affect floatability, and (3) large variation
of waste plastics feed in terms of composition. Flotation allows to separate PS, PVC,
PET, PC, and mixed polyolefins (MPO).
2.4.5 Sensor-based sorting

Plastic sorting, with respect to other materials, and/or different polymers, is usually
carried out utilizing specific materials’/polymers’ physical properties allowing separa-
tion. Separation often occurs defining handling architectures (i.e., separation
equipment) designed and set up in order to enhance how waste particles behave in
respect of the selected property to perform separation. This behavior is usually accom-
plished, as previously stated, through particle trajectory changes at the device output/s
and/or through concentration in different section of the separation equipment. The
mechanical removal of these different streams generates concentrates, wastes and, in
some cases, one or more intermediate compositional product classes, called “mid-
dlings.” Material physical property can be thus considered as the “direct” responsible
of separation.
The adoption of sensors to perform sorting means to follow a different approach,
requiring the utilization and the implementation of online analytical logics and robotic
units to perform the separation. Materials in fact, have to be first detected, then
identified and topologically assessed in the stream; after these steps automated devices
realize the sorting.
Following this approach, it substantially means to take into account two aspects.
The first one is linked to the sensing principle selected to perform materials identifica-
tion and the second one is related to the required actuators logics/architectures utilized
to collect the materials of interest from the investigated waste flow stream. Sensor-
based sorting techniques are thus substantially classified according to these principles
(i.e., sensing and collection). In all cases there are three main components of the
sorting architecture: a conveyor belt for materials feeding, a sensor connected to a
computer analyzing data collected from the waste stream on the conveyor belt, and
a pneumatic system to mechanically separate materials (Fig. 2.9). Sensors do not
require contact with the materials and are nondestructive.
2.4.5.1 Visible spectroscopy

Sorting in the visible range is mainly focused on the utilization of spectroscopic analyt-
ical techniques, performed in the wavelength range 400e700 nm, or on the adoption of
digital imaging. Both the approaches are not particularly efficient in the case of plastic
recycling, being that the detection principle is mainly based on what is detectable
according to investigated individuals’ pictorial attributes, that is, visible spectra,
when spectroscopy analysis is performed, or digital color components (RGB, HSY,
etc.), size, shape, and surface textural attributes when imaging is applied (J€ahne, 1993).
Feed waste Sensor
Air gun
Conveyor belt
Material 1 Material 2
Figure 2.9 Schematic representation of a sensor-based sorting system.

Both the approaches are not very efficient to perform polymer sorting; for this reason,
they are not widely utilized except sometimes at the beginning of the process and when
polymers are constituted by large products (i.e., several centimeters) whose color and/
or shape (Zhu and Basir, 2006) can be associated to a known specific polymer-based
manufactured product (i.e., container, pipe, frame, etc.). They can be used also at the
end of a plastic recycling process to sort by color a monomaterial stream of plastics, as
for example, green, blue, and transparent PET.
2.4.5.2 Near infrared spectroscopy

Near infrared spectroscopy (NIR) is probably the most utilized technology in plastic
recycling. It is based on the collection of reflected spectra of polymers properly ener-
gized by a light source (Beigbeder et al., 2013). The investigated wavelength range is
usually 1000e700 nm; in some cases it is extended to the SWIR region
(1000e2500 nm). The NIR sensor sorting system includes: a conveyor belt, illumina-
tion system and optical sensor, a separation unit with compressed air nozzles. Many
different polymers can be separated by near infrared sensors as they are characterized
by different spectral signature in such wavelength range (i.e., PP, PE, PVC, PET, PS,
etc.). Plastics can be also separated from other materials, as paper, wood, glass, stones,
etc. The reasons of the wide use of this technique are mainly related to: (1) NIR does
not require any direct contact with the investigated object, (2) it can be applied defining
very flexible architectures, thanks to the possibility to largely utilize fiber opticse
based architectures both to energize and to collect the spectral response of plastics
(i.e., analysis and identification, in respect of previously set up reference spectral
libraries of the different polymers’ infrared absorption bands), (3) high detection/iden-
tification speed, (4) multiple detection (i.e., multiple check of the same sample), and
(5) no color interference. The size of flakes to be sorted as well as flakes disposal
on the conveyor belt plays an important role, affecting the sensor detection. Sensing
probes, in fact, are characterized by a physical dimension that influences the investi-
gated image field and, as a consequence, the analytical spatial resolution of the single
sensing unit (i.e., usually installed as an array). Black or very dark polymers are almost
impossible to be identified due to their low surface reflectance.
2.4.5.3 Hyperspectral imaging

Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) is an innovative fast, and nondestructive technique able
to collect both spectral and spatial information from an object. The collected informa-
tion generates a data structure defined “hypercube,” that is a dataset containing both
spatial data (i.e., pixel coordinates: x and y axis) and spectral data (i.e., z axis, repre-
senting the spectrum associated to each pixel). The investigated spectral range depends
on the sensor mounted on the device and can vary from VIS to NIR, SWIR, or MWIR
regions, depending on applications. The application of this technique dramatically
grew in these last years in many sectors (i.e., chemical, pharmaceutical, agricultural,
food industry, etc.) and also in recycling: glass recycling (Bonifazi and Serranti,
2006), compost product quality control (Dall’Ara et al., 2012), recycled aggregates
from concrete (Serranti and Bonifazi, 2014; Bonifazi et al., 2015, 2018b) and charac-
terization of different plastic waste (Serranti et al., 2012a,b; Hu et al., 2013; Ulrici
et al., 2013).
This large use is intimately linked to some intrinsic characteristics of the HSI
sensing device (Bonifazi and Serranti, 2014) as: (1) the possibility to perform a contin-
uous monitoring of waste large flow streams as disposed on a conveyor belt thanks to
the scan line camera architecture, (2) easy topological definition of the individual to
sort, (3) utilization of different time scaleerelated sampling strategies, in case of
specific product oriented control/quality actions to develop, (4) implementation of
fast and reliable recognition logics, strongly linked to HSI detectors characteristics
(e.g., possibility handle spectra, images, or both spectra and images), (5) total absence
of environmental impacts and/or safety constraints related to the HSI utilized device,
and finally (6) relatively low cost of the device. With reference to polymer recycling,
HSI is particularly powerful (Jansen et al., 2012) allowing to implement online sorting
and/or quality control strategies, thanks to the possibility to identify the spectral
regions, in the NIR/SWIR range (1000e1700 or 1000e2500 nm), where polymer
molecules absorb light by overtone or combination vibrations (Workman and Weyer,
2007). This behavior produces spectral signature characteristics of the polymer thus
allowing its identification (Bonifazi et al., 2018a). In the last years, high-speed spectral
cameras working in the MWIR wavelength range were introduced in the market in
order to sort black polymers that are not classified by sensors working in the
commonly investigated spectral ranges (400e2500 nm) due to the higher light absorp-
tion and the consequent low reflectance (e.g.,: Rozenstein et al., 2017).
HSI-based sorting architectures are usually constituted by a conveyor unit (i.e., belt)
carrying materials to sort (Serranti et al., 2006). A sensing unit inspects and continu-
ously acquires spectra at a fixed rate. Spectra are then processed by a classification
engine previously set up, according to a material spectral reference library, and indi-
vidual/s recognition is performed. An array of compressed air nozzles mounted at
the end of the conveyor belt provides to separate through a shot of air the recognized
individuals (Tatzer et al., 2005; Picon et al., 2010).
2.4.5.4 X-ray fluorescence

Sorting based on X-ray fluorescence (XRF) is based on the detection of the emitted
wavelengths, as well as of the released energy, by a sample previously energized by
X-ray whose atoms release energy generating an X-ray fluorescence radiation. The
elements contained in the sample influence the emission both in terms of wavelengths
and energy. Such a technique is quite powerful and it is largely used in the waste
sector, mainly in wood recycling (Blassino et al., 2002) to evaluate the presence of
potential harmful elements (i.e., arsenic, chromium, copper, etc.).
In the waste plastic sector, this technique is primarily utilized to sort PVC from PET
(Brunner et al., 2015). The use of this technique is expected to increase in the future, as
it can be applied to the separation of brominated plastic from an input stream of
shredded plastics. Bromine is in fact largely used as flame-retardant, especially in elec-
tronic devices. Other XRF-based approaches have been proposed as the Energy
Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence (EDXRF) (Bezati et al., 2011) adding tracers to the
polymer matrix.
Sorting architectures are similar in both cases (i.e., XRF and EDXRF). Referring to
EDXRF, the operative unit is constituted by an X-ray beam energizing the waste flow
stream (i.e., particles transported on a conveyor belt) to analyze and sort. X-ray beam is
focused and passed through the material until it reaches the detector. The signal
collected by the detector is processed, the presence of tracers identified, their amount
evaluated, and according to predetermined rules, the corresponding plastic individuals
blow out by air.
XRF does not require any sample preparation/collection; it can identify black and/
or very dark polymers, as well the presence of contaminants on polymers surface and
as individuals. The disadvantages of this technique in plastic sorting is that it is not able
to distinguish between polymers. Furthermore, there are some safety constraints
related to the utilization of X-ray sources.
2.4.5.5 Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy

Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) is an analytical technique based on the
utilization of high power laser pulse that performs an ablation of the sample to analyze,
thus producing plasma plumes (Cremers and Radziemski, 2006). The radiation
produced by the ablated portion of the investigated material is then analyzed by a
CCD-based spectrometric device (Gondal et al., 2007). Following this approach
(i.e., identification of the atomic emission lines), it is thus possible to analyze the prop-
erties of waste in terms of constituent materials (Sattler and Yoshida, 1993) and/or, as
in the case of polymers, elements present as carbon and hydrogen and their resulting
line intensity ratio (C/H) (Anzano et al., 2008).
Recently a compact and reliable architecture was proposed to perform the recogni-
tion of polymer particles following a statistical analysis starting from the information
collected by the so-called laser-induced plasma spectroscopy (LIPS) and processed
performing linear and rank correlations, in the wavelength interval: 200e800 nm
(Anzano et al., 2006) or performing, as previously outlined, instant ratio analysis of
molecular bands to identify the different energetic materials (Anzano et al., 2011).
Following this latter approach PVC, PS, PET, PP, LPDE, and HDPE can be identified.
Sorting architecture is constituted by mechanical units that, according to the LIPS
based detection, sort polymers into their respective bins.
2.4.6 Auxiliary separation technologies

Auxiliary separation technologies, referred to as plastic waste recycling, are those
allowing to clean the plastic waste stream from the presence of other materials with
different characteristics and/or nature. They are usually applied at the beginning
(i.e., scalping) or at the end (i.e., refining) of the process. Materials usually removed
through such techniques are: (1) ferrous metals, as low-grade stainless steel, nickel
alloys, etc., (2)nonferrous metals, as aluminum. Magnets (Wills, 2016) and Eddy cur-
rent (Rem, 1999) based separators, respectively, are commonly utilized.
2.4.6.1 Magnetic separation

The magnetic separation is commonly applied utilizing belt magnets, magnetic head
pulleys, and drum magnets (Svoboda, 2004). Schematic representations of the
different typologies of magnetic separators are reported in Fig. 2.10. In belt magnets,
the magnet is usually installed above the plastic waste flow stream (Fig. 2.10a).
Belt magnet
Feed waste
(a)
Conveyor belt
Magnetic particles
Non magnetic particles
Feed waste
(b) Magnetic head pulley
Conveyor belt
Magnetic particles
Feed waste
(c)
Conveyor belt
Magnetic particles
Magnetic
drum
Figure 2.10 Different typologies of magnetic separators. (a) Overbelt magnetic separator; (b)
Magnetic head pulley separator; (c) Magnetic drum separator.
The overhead magnetic field has a belt moving across its surface at approximately a
90 degree angle to the material flow. Ferrous metal particles are thus attracted,
removed from plastics, and discharged, as the moving belt of the separator turns
away from the magnetic field. Magnetic head pulleys are usually installed at the end
of a conveyor belt, beneath the belt (Fig. 2.10b). Ferrous metal particles are thus
held to the belt, while plastics can be downloaded. Drum magnets are commonly
installed inside feeder chutes, between chutes and conveyors (Fig. 2.10c). Ferrous
metals are held by the drum, until a divider provides to its discharge; on the contrary,
plastic wastes continue their flow. All the previous mentioned devices are normally
positioned at the beginning of the plastics recycling plant having the aim to remove
large magnetic polluting individuals. To perform a strong refining/control of the final
products, high-intensity permanent magnets are usually utilized (Svoboda and Fujita,
2003.).
2.4.6.2 Eddy current separation

Eddy current separation is based on the use of a high speed magnetic rotor system and
is used to remove nonferrous metals (i.e., aluminum and copper) from waste plastic
streams. Due to the high speed of the rotor, an electric current, called Eddy current,
is induced into conducting metals. The induced electric current produces a magnetic
field, opposed by the field created by the rotor, repelling the conducting metals. The
remaining materials such as plastics, glass, and other dry recyclables will simply free-
fall over the rotor, separating them from the repelled metals (Fig. 2.11). Eddy current
separators are usually located in the preliminary stages of the process. Such a choice is
mainly due to the fact that Eddy current separation process is highly dependent on the
size of the feed particles according to its separation principle. The magnitude of the
repulsive forces depends on the specific conductivity, mass, morphological and mor-
phometrical characteristics of the particles, and on the intensity and distribution of the
magnetic field (Van der Walk et al., 1986).
Feed waste
Magnetic
high-speed rotor
Conveyor belt
Non metal particles
Non ferrous metal particles
Figure 2.11 Schematic representation of an eddy current separator.
2.5 Recycled plastics quality control

The quality certification of recycled plastic products is fundamental to increase their
economic value and to foster their penetration in the market. Product quality assess-
ment is an important aspect in all industrial manufacturing sectors, but this is particu-
larly true for the recycled materials whose market is still hindered by many barriers.
Recycled polymeric materials are expected to have the same high quality and
performance characteristics of those of the corresponding virgin polymers; however,
the achievement of high quality levels requested by the end users through the mechan-
ical recycling process is not an easy task. Furthermore, many plastic brand owners and
manufacturers distrust recycled plastics and fear that they cannot assure their need of
high volumes of reliable material with clearly defined constant quality specifications.
As a consequence, there is a low demand for recycled plastic, especially in high value
products, and its use is often limited to low-value or niche applications (COM, 2018).
It is evident that there is a strong need not only to ensure and to improve quality of
plastic recycled products through technological innovation in the recycling process,
but also to develop and define specific quality standards for recycled plastic products.
The quality requirements must be related to the different applications of plastic prod-
ucts such as food contact or durable goods like electronics and automobiles.
Recycled plastics can vary from virgin resins in a number of ways, including
contamination originated from multiple sources (e.g., impurities, the use-phase,
misuse, degradation, improper separation of materials, legacy substances, or cross-
contamination during waste collection). Such incidental contaminants can affect the
quality and safety of recyclates and therefore fast, cost-effective quality control strate-
gies should be developed and implemented at plastic recyclers’ premises, in order to
produce a certified output that meet customer specifications (Vilaplana and Karlsson,
2008).
2.5.1 Recycled plastics quality measurements

The quality assessment of recycled plastic products should be based not only on the
same testing equipment commonly utilized for virgin resins, but also on specific char-
acterization measurements related to the possible contamination and degradation of a
plastic recycled material.
Traditionally the basic measurements to evaluate plastic product quality and perfor-
mance in different applications are rheological and mechanical properties (e.g., melt
flow rate, tensile and impact strength, etc.). For recycled plastics it is important to
assess also other important properties that can affect quality, such as the degree of
mixing, in terms of presence of polymeric impurities in a single polymer stream, the
level of degradation (chemical and structural/textural alteration), and the presence of
low-molecular weight compounds such as contaminants, additives, etc. (Karlsson,
2004; Vilaplana et al., 2007).
One of the main challenges related to the production of plastic recycled materials
lies in the fact that different polymers are incompatible and immiscible at molecular
level; even low levels of contaminations will affect the quality of the target stream,
for example, the presence of small amounts of PVC in a PET stream will make it brittle
and yellowish when recycled (Hahladakis and Iacovidou, 2018). It follows that plastic
must be recycled as much as possible in single polymer streams. For a plastic producer,
stability in composition of the plastic raw material fed to the plant is very important,
since even small variations in melting point or other properties can affect the produc-
tion, in terms of functionality, strength, or durability of products that is not acceptable
for some high-tech applications such as medical devices or automobile components.
This means that a constant and stable composition of a recycled plastic stream must
be assured.
The methods commonly utilized to check the quality of a single polymer recycled
stream in terms of presence of other polymers are applied at laboratory scale, which
means time-consuming operations, involving the presence of a trained operator, a
sample collection, and preparation step. Examples of commonly adopted techniques
at laboratory scale are DSC (Differential Scanning Calorimetry) and FT-IR (Fourier-
Transform Infrared Spectroscopy). An alternative solution to check the quality of the
recycled plastic products is the use of hyperspectral imaging that can be applied
online directly on the conveyor belt without any sample preparation (Serranti
et al., 2011; Luciani et al., 2015) (Fig. 2.12). Polymer mixing evaluation can be
achieved through the definition of classification models, allowing the identification
of different plastics at the same time. HSI in the NIR/SWIR wavelengths ranges
(1000e1700/2500 nm) coupled with chemometrics were successfully applied to
set up fast and reliable quality control strategies at recycling plant scale (i.e., better
and more strict control of sorting and separation process stages) with reference to
many different polymers, including PP, HDPE, LDPE, PET, PVC, etc. (Bonifazi
et al., 2018a).
Spectral-imaging
instrumentation Monitor
Illuminant Moving
belt
Console
PC
Figure 2.12 HSI platform working in the NIR range (1000e1700 nm) developed for quality
control of different recycled polymers.
The possible presence of harmful substances can also limit the use of recycled
plastic as secondary raw materials, especially in applications related to food pack-
aging, due to possible dangerous contamination. X-ray fluorescence can be used to
check the presence of hazardous materials and elements, such as brominated flame
retardants and chlorine-containing materials, both of which can only be detected at
the elemental level through X-ray analysis. Other analytical techniques can be
used to determine the presence of additives in plastics, such as inductively coupled
plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) or LIBS (Vilaplana and Karlsson,
2008).
2.6 Technical challenges in plastic recycling

In the following sections, some of the main current hot research topics on plastic recy-
cling are introduced.
2.6.1 PP-PE separation

Polypropylene and polyethylene, belonging to the family of polyolefins, are the most
produced plastics at global level. A mixture of PP-PE is commonly an output of a recy-
cling plant treating plastics, especially when dealing with household waste due to their
wide use in packaging. However, in order to produce high-quality secondary polyole-
fins that means single polymer streams, a purity of at least 97% must be reached
(Bakker et al., 2009). MDS, as already mentioned in Section 2.4.3, was proposed as
a powerful technology to separate PP and PE (Fig. 2.8). Its innovation is based on
the use of a medium characterized by a gradient of density, allowing to separate not
only materials with very low differences in density, as PP and PE, but also more
than two materials in one single step (Serranti et al., 2015).
2.6.2 LDPE-HDPE separation

LDPE and HDPE are both semicrystalline polymers but the degree of crystallinity is
higher for HDPE and lower for LDPE, due to the different number of polymer
branches (da Silva and Wiebeck, 2017). Their mechanical separation is not an easy
task, due to their very similar physical characteristics, and especially their density
(i.e., LDPE: 0.926e0.939 g/cm3 and HDPE: 0.940e0.965 g/cm3).
The possibility to correctly identify these two polymers by fast and reliable
methods working online is still a challenge and represents an important goal to reach.
In a recent study, an innovative strategy based on SWIR-HSI was explored allowing
LDPE, HDPE, and other polymers to be recognized in one shot in a plastic waste
flow stream (Serranti et al., 2018) (Fig. 2.13). The study was carried out at
laboratory-scale, but it is very promising and it could be applied in the near future
also at plant-scale, thanks to the fast growing of HSI technologies and corresponding
computing power.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
flag was not completely hauled down, the Unionists were for a moment uncertain of
its import, but all firing was ordered to cease. In a minute more the white flag was
raised, and with cheer after cheer all along the batteries on Tybee, came down the
stars and bars. It was on the 11th of April, a year to a day from the time when the stars
and stripes were first dishonored by Americans at Fort Sumter.
General Hunter was aboard the McClellan with his aides, watching the
engagement. Generals Gillmore and Benham were active, and rode rapidly out to
Goat’s Point. On arriving at this place, General Gillmore, with his aid, Mr. Badeau,
and Colonel Rust, entered a boat and put off for the fort. The passage was rough, the
channel unknown, and the skiff got aground, and was nearly upset; but at last, soaked
and dripping, the party landed on Cockspur Island.
They were met near the landing-place by Captain Sims, of the Georgia Volunteers,
who conducted them to the fort. Colonel Olmstead, the commandant, stood at the
entrance, and received them courteously. He invited General Gillmore into his own
quarters, for a private interview. The terms of capitulation were arranged, and
General Gillmore was then conducted over the fort by the Colonel, and took his leave,
accompanied by Colonel Rust. General Hunter, in the mean time, had sent
messengers to the fort. Colonel Olmstead showed them around the works, and
conducted them to the interior, when the swords were delivered. This took place in
the Colonel’s headquarters, all standing. Major Halpine represented General Hunter.
As soon as this ceremony was over, the American flag was raised, and the stars and
stripes floated again on the walls of Fort Pulaski. In giving up his sword, Colonel
Olmstead said, “I yield my sword, but I trust I have not disgraced it.”
The arms of the privates had been previously stacked on the parade, and the men
marched to quarters. Both officers and men were allowed to remain all night in their
usual quarters. The interior of the fort presented a sorry picture. Blindages had been
put up extending on all the rampart, and a part rendered bomb-proof; but shot and
shell had burst through many of the sides—knocked in walls, broken down stairways,
entered casemates, upset guns, and piled up masses of rubbish and debris all around.
Seven guns on the parapet were dismounted; nearly every traverse had been struck
and partly torn to pieces; all the passageways were obstructed by piles of stones and
fallen timber; the magazine had been struck, and part of its outer casing of brick torn
away, while at the breach, the havoc was, of course, greatest of all. The breach was
entirely practicable; the ditch, sixty feet across, was more than half filled up by the
fragments that had fallen, and half a dozen men abreast could have entered the
aperture. The Colonel declared, however, that he should have held out until nightfall,
had the magazine not been struck. This, of course, settled his fate, and rendered any
prolonged resistance a useless risk of human life. Forty thousand pounds of powder,
seven thousand shot and shell, and forty-seven guns were captured. The prisoners
were three hundred and sixty in number, and belonged to the Georgia Volunteers, the
Oglethorpe Light Infantry, and to a German regiment. The Colonel excited the
sympathies of his captors by a bearing at once soldierly and subdued. The officers
invited the Unionists to their quarters, where several took supper, and some even
slept with the rebels whom they had been fighting a few hours before. There was no
apparent bitterness on either side; no desire to introduce personal animosities.
This long and severely contested siege resulted in the loss of only two lives, while
the number of wounded was very small. This fact is remarkable, in view of the
immense amount of shot and shell exchanged during the bombardment.
On Sunday, the 13th, the men were divided into two parties—the officers and about
two-thirds of the men forming the first, who were placed on the Ben de Ford—the
remainder on the Honduras, and taken to Bay Point. Here they were transferred to
the McClellan and Star of the South, to be sent to Fort Columbus, in the harbor of
New York.
BATTLE OF SOUTH MILLS, CAMDEN, N. C.
April 20, 1862.
A short but severely contested engagement took place on the 20th

of April, between the command of General J. L. Reno, and a body of
rebels posted in a strong position to intercept the supposed advance
of the Federal troops on Norfolk. General Burnside directed General
Reno to make a demonstration on that city, and the latter, taking
with him from Newbern the Twenty-first Massachusetts and Fifty-
first Pennsylvania, proceeded to Roanoke, where he was joined by
detachments of the Eighty-ninth New York and Sixth New
Hampshire. With these forces he started for Elizabeth City, and
commenced disembarking at midnight, on the 19th, at a point about
three miles below the city, on the east side.
By three A. M. Colonel Hawkins’ brigade, consisting of the Ninth
and Eighty-ninth New York, and Sixth New Hampshire, were landed
and ready to move. Colonel Hawkins proceeded with his brigade
toward South Mills. General Reno remained to bring up the other
two regiments, which had been delayed by the grounding of their
vessels at the mouth of the river. They came up at daylight, and were
landed by seven A. M. General Reno marched directly toward South
Mills, and about twelve miles out met Colonel Hawkins, with his
brigade, who, either by the treachery or incompetency of his guide,
had been led some miles out of his way. As his men were very much
jaded by the long march, they were ordered to follow the Second
brigade, about four miles further, to within a mile and a half of South
Mills.
The rebels were posted here, and opened a fire of artillery, before
the advanced guard discovered them. General Reno reconnoitered
their position, and found that they were posted strongly in a line
perpendicular to the road, their infantry in ditches, their artillery
commanding all the direct approaches, and their rear protected by a
dense forest. He ordered the Fifty-first Pennsylvania immediately to
file to the right, and pass over to the edge of the woods, to turn their
left—the Twenty-first Massachusetts pursuing the same course; and
when Colonel Hawkins came up with his brigade, he was sent with
the Ninth and Eighty-ninth New York to their support.
The Sixth New Hampshire was formed in line to the left of the
road, and its commander ordered to support the four pieces of
artillery. Owing to the excessive fatigue of the men, they met with
some delay in reaching their position. Meanwhile the enemy kept up
a brisk artillery fire, which was gallantly responded to by the small
pieces under charge of Colonel Howard, of the Coast Guard. As soon
as the Fifty-first Pennsylvania and Twenty-first Massachusetts had
succeeded in turning their left, they opened a brisk musketry fire,
and, about the same time, the Ninth New York, also coming in range,
eager to engage, unfortunately charged upon the enemy’s artillery. It
was a most gallant charge, but they were exposed to a deadly fire of
grape and musketry, and forced to retire, but rallied immediately
upon the Eighty-ninth New York. General Reno then ordered both
regiments to form a junction with the Twenty-first Massachusetts. In
the meantime, the Fifty-first Pennsylvania and Twenty-first
Massachusetts kept up an incessant fire upon the rebels, who had
withdrawn their artillery, and commenced to retreat in good order.
The Sixth New Hampshire had steadily advanced in line to the left of
the road, and when within about two hundred yards poured in a
deadly volley, which completely demoralized the enemy and ended
the battle.
The men rested under arms in line of battle, until about ten
o’clock, P. M., when they were ordered to return to the boats, having
accomplished the principal object of the expedition, that of
conveying the idea that the entire Burnside Expedition was marching
upon Norfolk. Owing to a want of transportation, sixteen of the most
severely wounded were left behind. Assistant-Surgeon Warren was
left with them. Only about ten or fifteen prisoners were taken. Most
of them belonged to the Third Georgia regiment. The Ninth New
York suffered most severely, owing to their premature charge. The
total loss of the Federal troops in killed and wounded was about
ninety, some sixty of the number belonging to that regiment.
Just as the decisive volley of the Sixth New Hampshire had
compelled the rebels to abandon their position, a terrific thunder
storm broke upon the scene of conflict, and a heavy rain rendered the
hope of pursuit futile. After burying the dead, and taking a brief rest,
General Reno and his command took up their march for
headquarters, at Newbern. On the advance the sun beat fiercely upon
his exhausted men, the weather was intensely hot, and they were
almost prostrated with the fatigue of the battle and the labor of the
march, before they reached a place of rest.
CAPTURE OF FORT MACON, N. C.
April 26, 1862.
The occupation of the town of Beaufort and Morehead City by the

Federal troops, on the 24th of March, was followed by active
preparations for the reduction of Fort Macon, which commanded the
entrance to the harbor. It was anticipated that on the retreat of the
rebel troops from Beaufort the overwhelming numbers and
equipment of the national forces would demonstrate to the
commander of the fort the hopelessness of any attempt to resist the
armament that would be brought against him in the event of his
refusal to surrender. This hope was not realized. Colonel M. J. White,
the commander, resolved to meet the Union forces with every
possible resistance, and if the fort was captured by the Federal arms,
the doughty rebel determined that it should be purchased at no slight
cost.
Fort Macon is situated on a bluff on Bogue’s Bank, nearly two
miles from the town of Beaufort. It commands the entrance to the
harbor, and no vessel can enter the main channel without coming
within range of its guns. Opposite the fort, at the entrance of the
harbor, is Shackelford Banks, distant about one mile and a half. Fort
Macon is of a hexagonal form, and has two tiers of guns—one in
casemated bomb-proof, and the other en barbette. Its armament
consisted of twenty 32-pounders, thirty 24-pounders, two 18-
pounders, three field pieces for flank defence, twelve flank howitzers,
eight 8-inch howitzers (heavy), eight 8-inch howitzers (light), one 13-
inch mortar, three 10-inch mortars, and two Cohorn mortars—total,
89 guns. The war garrison of the fort was 300 men. There are large
furnaces in the fort for heating shot, and before the investment there
was a considerable quantity of powder in the magazine. The
construction of Fort Macon was commenced in 1826, by Captain
Eliason, of the United States Engineer Corps, and was finished in
1860, by Captain, afterwards Brigadier-General John G. Foster.
This fort, like most others in the Southern States, at the opening of
the rebellion, was in an almost defenceless condition. Ordnance
Sergeant Alexander was the sole guardian of this important position
in April, 1861.
In March, the vote on the question of calling a State Convention
was taken in North Carolina, and a majority was given against the
Convention. Governor Ellis assured the officer in command that the
fort would not be taken from under the control of the government,
but on the 11th of April, a citizen of Beaufort, in the interest of the
secessionists, collected a body of fifty men, with whom he crossed
over to the fort and demanded its surrender. Sergeant Alexander
delivered up the keys, and the rebel flag was hoisted on its walls.
Subsequently stores and supplies for a garrison of 500 men were
collected and placed within it, and an efficient body of troops took
possession, under Colonel White.
On March 25th, 1862, Morehead City, on the mainland, opposite
Bogue Island, was occupied by a portion of General Parke’s division
of Burnside’s army. A few days subsequently a landing had been
effected on Bogue Island, and a camp established for the force
selected to operate against Fort Macon. On the 11th of April the
enemy’s pickets were driven in by the Fifth Rhode Island regiment
and one company of the Fourth Rhode Island, and eligible localities
for the batteries were selected by Captain Williamson, Topographical
Engineer on General Burnside’s staff. On the next day a working
party commenced the erection of the main battery, and from that
time the labor proceeded night and day. The troops employed in this
service were the Fourth and Fifth Rhode Island and the Eighth
Connecticut regiments. The labor was most severe. The men were
often on duty twenty-four hours at a time, and labored zealously to
accomplish their task in the shortest possible period. What rest they
got when on duty was obtained by sleeping on the sands, as no tents
or barracks could be erected, since these would have informed the
rebels of the location of the troops, and indicated the position of the
batteries. The picket duty performed by the men was also very
severe. All their work had to be done under a continuous and often
severe fire from the fort. From this, however, they were protected by
the peculiar formation of the ground, which consisted of a succession
of sand-hills up to within about half a mile of the fort.
Previous to the bombardment the garrison were allowed to send
letters to their friends at Beaufort.
Three batteries were erected for the reduction of the fort. The first
was mounted with four ten-inch mortars, and was built under cover
of a large sand-hill, near the edge of the marshes which line the
northern shore of the island, at a distance of about 1,400 yards from
the fort. This battery was allotted to Lieutenant Flagler, and manned
by a portion of battery I, New York Third artillery. The second was in
advance 100 yards, built and worked by Captain Lewis O. Morris,
and Lieutenants Gowan and Pollock. Three long thirty-pound siege
Parrott guns, rifled, composed its armament. The last battery
consisted of four eight-inch mortars. It stood 100 yards in advance of
the second battery, and was placed in charge of Lieutenant Prouty,
and manned by a detachment of battery I, Third New York artillery.
Rifle-pits and trenches were also excavated.
On the 24th of April, the preparations having been completed,
General Burnside arrived from Newbern, on the steamer Alice Price,
having in tow two barges, the Schrapnel and Grenade, fitted up as
floating batteries, each armed with two thirty-pound Parrott guns.
The Schrapnel had in addition a twelve-pounder rifled Ward gun.
They anchored about three miles below the fort.
During the afternoon a flag of truce was sent to the fort, in charge
of Captain Biggs, of General Burnside’s staff, with a demand for its
surrender. Colonel White refused to yield to the demand, and
announced his purpose to defend the fort to the last extremity. An
understanding was obtained, however, that the commander should
have a personal interview with General Burnside on the following
morning.
Accordingly, at an early hour on the 25th, the steamer Alice Price,
under a flag of truce, proceeded down the bay to a point previously
indicated, where General Burnside was soon joined by Colonel
White. The meeting was courteous. Colonel White said that he had
been placed in command of the fort for the purpose of holding it, and
should defend it to the best of his ability.
On the following morning, the 26th, the Federal forces took their
respective posts at an early hour. The morning mists had not yet
disappeared, when orders were given for the opening of the siege,
and before six o’clock the loud thunder of the guns and the deep
boom of the heavy mortars broke on the ears of the sleeping citizens
of Beaufort, and roused the slumbering garrison of the belligerent
fort. Booming loudly over the waters, and rolling away in the
distance, the explosions followed in rapid succession for half an hour
before the garrison was ready to respond. When prepared, the rebels
bravely assumed their allotted positions, manned their guns, and
Fort Macon opened upon the national flag.
During the forenoon the eight-inch mortar battery of Lieutenant
Prouty sent its shells with regularity and precision into the fort, and
at each explosion the red dirt and sand of the glacis’ slopes,
ramparts, parapets and terrepleins were dashed in a cloud many feet
into the air. The flagstaff, with its defiant colors floating at the top,
was at times completely obscured in the smoke and dust which rose
with the bursting of the missiles. The ten-inch mortar battery was
not so successful in the morning. The shells from it burst beyond or
high in air over the fort, scattering the fragments of iron far and wide
into the water; but in the afternoon the battery played with an effect
that was evidenced in the decreased fire from the fort.
The battery of Parrott guns under command of Captain Morris, in
the mean time, kept up an incessant fire upon the ramparts. The
difficulty of obtaining accurate range was for some time experienced,
and the shots either went over the fort, ricocheting across the water
towards Shackleford Banks, or fell short and buried themselves in
the sand and glacis on its westerly side. But the range grew more
accurate with every shot, and from twelve o’clock until the close of
the fight Captain Morris seldom failed to plant his terrible conical
balls among the guns, on the edges of the ramparts, and against the
walls. The latter were pierced in two places, the balls passing through
into the casemates, from which their unceremonious visit hastily
expelled the occupants. Wherever these shots struck they tore
through all obstacles with a force that hurled fragments of iron and
brick, stones, grass-sods and sand bags about in every direction.
Many of the rebels were knocked down senseless by the flying sods.
When it is considered that the walls of the fort were protected by the
slopes of the glacis, the accuracy of the firing from the Parrott battery
will be perceived. That part of the walls just protruding above the
ramparts of the glacis was the only target presented whereat to aim
for the purpose of penetrating the casemates.
About two o’clock, P. M., Major Allen went out with a flag of truce to
carry letters written to the garrison from their friends in Beaufort.
Many of these entreated the officers to prevail upon Colonel White to
surrender the fort. Some ladies in Beaufort set on foot a petition to
that effect.
The precision attained by the practice of the forenoon, and the
facility of loading and firing, which even the experience of a few
hours had given, were now evidenced in the successful results of each
shot from the Union batteries. The scene assumed its grandest aspect
after two o’clock. A flash and a puff of smoke betokened a discharge;
an interval elapsed, which terminated with the report of the piece;
then came the sonorous hum of the shell as it flew through the air;
another puff of smoke soon followed by a second report, and the
deadly missile had exploded.
With glasses every manœuvre in the fort could be distinctly seen.
The look out was ensconced behind a pile of sand bags upon the
ramparts, and spectators fancied they could hear him ejaculate the
word “Down!” as he marked the approach of every shot. Its effect was
like magic. As he himself disappeared, down out of sight went the
crowd of men around the guns, to reappear again when the shot had
accomplished its errand.
Little remains to tell of the bombardment. The garrison had at first
responded with some seven or eight guns, exclusive of carronades,
which were made to serve the purpose of mortars. The squads of
gunners could be observed passing about, alternating with the pieces
as they became hot under the discharges. Gradually the fire
slackened to four, then to three, and then to two guns. The Federal
shot and shell were doing their duty, and subsequent examination
showed that fifteen guns were dismounted or disabled on the fort.
To those who worked the mortars of the Federal batteries, the
matter was entirely new, and to Captain Ammon’s men, of the Third
New York artillery, the greatest praise is deserved for their cool and
unflinching conduct in this their first experience under fire. The
exposed nature of Captain Morris’ battery of siege guns drew upon it
almost the concentrated fire of the fort, and shot and shell rained
around it. The only injury sustained by the battery was the
temporary dismounting of one of the guns by a thirty-two-pound
solid shot, which came through the embrasure and carried off a
wheel. Another carriage was in readiness, and the gun was soon
remounted. One of the guns was slightly dented by a solid shot,
which struck the reinforce or band around the breech, and then
glanced off. The sand bags in all the batteries were disturbed more or
less by the concussions, and the embrasures of the three-gun battery
were begrimed and black with powder. Eleven hundred shots in all
were fired on the Federal side, and of these five hundred and sixty
struck the fort.
The firing from the fort gradually slackened as the guns one after
another became disabled, until at last the iron thunderers ceased to
respond to the continuous peals of the Federal batteries. About half-
past four o’clock a white flag was run up over one of the guns, dimly
seen through the smoke that had just before issued from it in a heavy
cloud. Not long after two officers left the fort, bearing a flag of truce.
They advanced towards the batteries, and Captain Pell, of General
Burnside’s staff, and Lieutenant Hill, of General Parke’s staff went
out to meet them. They were Captains Pool and Guion, with a
message from Col. White, asking the terms of surrender. General
Parke replied that the only terms were unconditional surrender, but
that he would communicate with General Burnside, who might make
different arrangements. The inquiry was telegraphed to Beaufort,
and a messenger was sent off to General Burnside, who was on board
the Alice Price, some distance up the river. In the morning General
Burnside returned to the harbor, and had an interview with Colonel
White, on board the Alice Price, when the terms of capitulation were
agreed upon. The fort, armament and garrison were to be
surrendered to the United States, the officers and men being released
on parole, until properly exchanged, returning to their homes with
their private effects, such as clothing, bedding, books, etc.
Immediately after the return of Colonel White to his quarters,
preparations for the surrender commenced. After a little interval the
gates were thrown open and a train of soldiers marched out, and
forming a square on the green, just outside, stood a few moments in
impressive stillness. Then they formed into line, where they stacked
their arms, and returned to their quarters.
General Burnside, General Parke, and Captains Biggs and King
directly after this ceremony, returned from the fort, and the Fifth
Rhode Island being ordered into line, came up. General Burnside
unfolded the new colors presented by the State of Rhode Island,
inscribed with the words “Roanoke” and “Newbern,” which had been
just received, and returned them to the color-bearer, who took his
place at the head of the column. The regiment then moved forward in
order, to take formal possession of the fort.
The time had at last come for the great event. The wharves and
houses of Beaufort were crowded with spectators. The surrounding
waters were covered with small craft, hovering near the scene. The
squadron of gunboats, with steam up and colors flying, lay off and on
outside the bar. At half-past ten o’clock a squad of men from the
garrison, detailed by Colonel White for the purpose, cut loose the
halliards and hauled down the rebel flag. Ten minutes later four of
the Rhode Island boys hoisted the American ensign, the glorious
stars and stripes, and a loud cheer broke from the men, which was
caught up and echoed by the sailors on shipboard, and even by the
citizens over the harbor, in Beaufort, whose shout came cheerily on
the breeze.
The Federal fleet, consisting of the steamers State of Georgia,
Chippewa, Daylight, and bark Gemsbok, under command of Flag-
officer S. Lockwood, took an active part in the bombardment in the
forenoon.
The destruction effected by the bombardment was like that at Fort
Pulaski. The works outside as well as inside, gave incontestible proof
of the execution of the heavy projectiles hurled at the fort. They also
showed as clearly the bravery of the men who defended it, and
proved that though they were engaged in rebellion, they had the
courage and energy of heroic soldiers.
The garrison consisted of about four hundred and fifty men,
exclusive of the officers. There were found in the fort nearly twenty
thousand pounds of powder, shot and shell in proportion, and a large
quantity of provisions.
The rebel loss was 7 killed, 18 wounded; Federal, 1 killed and 3
wounded.
SIEGE OF YORKTOWN, VA.
On Sunday, the 9th of March, the rebel camps at Centreville,

Manassas and vicinity were evacuated, and on the 10th, the army of
General McClellan commenced a forward movement from the
vicinity of Washington toward the abandoned works of the enemy.
On the same day a portion of General Kearney’s forces reached
Centreville, and Federal scouts had explored the deserted works at
Manassas Junction. The enemy continued their retreat on the line of
the Orange railroad, burning the bridges, and destroying the railroad
property on their route.
On the 14th, General McClellan issued an address to the army
from his headquarters at Fairfax Court-House, complimenting the
men on their discipline, equipment, and patience during the long
delay incident to the work of preparation. They were now to be
brought face to face with the enemy, and he besought the army to
place perfect trust in him, though his plans of action might seem at
times unaccountable.
The cheering news of the capture of New Madrid, the evacuation of
Columbus, and the victory at Pea Ridge, now filled all loyal hearts
with enthusiasm; and it was fully believed that the army of the
Potomac was on the direct route to Richmond, destined to give the
death-blow to the rebellion before the month of April should open.
Will the rebels make a stand? asked many a confident Unionist,
hopeful that the prestige of McClellan’s splendid army would compel
the enemy to retire from point to point without risking a battle.
The month of March passed;—and while the public mind was
animated with the most cheering details of the western victories—the
capture of Newbern, and the defeat of the enemy at Winchester, the
great army of the Potomac appeared for the time to have passed from
recollection. The Government censorship restrained the publication
of any reports of McClellan’s movements, and the people, left
entirely to hope and conjecture, were sanguine in anticipation of the
speedy possession of the Confederate capital.
Late in the month, rumors reached the northern cities of the
arrival of forces at Old Point, on the James river, twenty miles from
Norfolk, which were supposed by the Richmond papers to be
reinforcements for Burnside. Again curiosity was awakened by the
immense number of transports called for and chartered by the
Government, daily arriving at the mouth of the Chesapeake. On the
26th, Great Bethel was taken possession of by the Federal troops,
and on the 29th a reconnoissance in force was made toward
Yorktown. It was now generally known that the large army under
General McClellan had been conveyed by transports to Old Point,
and was marching to attack the rebel entrenchments at Yorktown,
the key of the Peninsula.
On the 5th of April, General McClellan’s dispatch to the Secretary
of War, announced that his army had that day arrived in front of the
enemy’s works, having met with but slight opposition on its route.
During this period the weather was unfavorable for military
operations. Heavy storm-clouds frowned inauspiciously on the
approaching army, rain fell almost daily in torrents, and this at a
time when there could be no adequate provision for shelter.
The Federal army was now destined to undergo an experience of
toil and privations calculated to try its endurance to the utmost.
Solid roads were absolutely necessary for transportation from the
landings to the various encampments, as it was impossible to draw
the immense siege and supply trains over or through the soft alluvial
mire formed by the unremitting rains, while the creeks and water
courses were swollen into torrents. Skirmishing was of daily
occurrence—for the enemy neglected no opportunity to annoy their
formidable opponents, while the Federal army found it necessary to
push its advances within commanding reach of the rebel
entrenchments, which stretched from the York to the James rivers, a
distance of six miles. The rebel earthworks were ponderously built—
some of them of a height and thickness hitherto unparalleled in any
war.
The Union soldiery toiled incessantly in the trenches, while
covering parties, with efficient batteries, stood guard in their
defence, and daily sacrificed some of their brave numbers while
protecting their toiling comrades.
The labors of the Federal army soon became apparent. Formidable
earthworks began to show their heads, and artillery of the largest
calibre was put in position. The rebel generals were struck with
astonishment and dismay when the evidences of engineering skill
hitherto unsuspected, stood revealed before them.
On the other hand, every day more fully revealed the extensive and
intricate line of the rebel defences. Their strength in forts, lunettes
and rifle-pits—their constantly increasing numbers, and untiring
activity, with their accurate knowledge of the topography of the
country, increased the magnitude of the work before the Federal
army. The natural obstacles to its progress were by no means few or
trifling. The sinuous windings of the line of attack they were obliged
to assume—the innumerable swamps and pools of water confronting
them on every side, the almost impenetrable forests and tangled
undergrowth added to their labors and their sufferings. Cold and
shivering under garments saturated anew by the rains of to-day, ere
those of yesterday had been vaporized, the soldiers endured the
pangs of hunger and fatigue unappalled. In view of the terrific
struggle before them, human suffering counted for nothing with
these brave men. No signs of discontent were manifest. Even in their
hardest trials the utmost cheerfulness prevailed; and in more remote
positions, where a less rigid discipline was enforced, the patriotic
strains of “The Star Spangled Banner” and the “Red, White and
Blue,” were heard ringing up through the storm. Not unfrequently,
with faces turned toward the patriot homes from whence they came,
would they sing “Do they Miss me at Home?” or “Let me Kiss him for
his Mother”—while they breathed the silent prayer that, through the
uncertainties of war, they might be permitted again to mingle with
their friends in the enjoyment of a bravely won peace.
Daily would some adventurous band of Federal soldiers explore
the intricacies of the rebel defences, coming constantly in collision
with the enemy. In these adventures the new and efficient regiments
of sharpshooters, just introduced into the United States army,
rendered valuable service.
A month before the Union army invested Yorktown, the iron
battery Merrimac had made her advent in Hampton Roads, and after
destroying the noble old frigates Cumberland and Congress—the
pride of a past era—she met the Monitor, her conqueror and the
nation’s champion. The combat that ensued has stamped a glorious
page on the world’s history for all time. Like Lucifer in his fall, the
rebel monster shrank with “despairing, cursing rage” behind the
batteries at Yorktown, while the terrors of her exploits, and
rejoicings at her defeat, quickened the nation’s heart-pulses from
Maine to Maryland.
The noble Minnesota, resting in calm and majestic repose on the
waters of the Chesapeake, hitherto would have acknowledged no
superior in a naval combat. An exposure for two hours to the heavy
guns of the Merrimac, which pierced her wooden walls with shot and
shell, while her own missiles were ineffective as pebbles on the scales
of the leviathan, destroyed her prestige and her pride of strength.
An efficient fleet of gunboats had been ordered to act in
conjunction with McClellan’s forces in the reduction of Yorktown;
but the presence of the Merrimac no doubt frustrated their plans. On
the 15th of April several of the gunboats commenced shelling the
woods below Gloucester. One boat approaching within two miles of
Yorktown, brought her guns to bear on that place, until driven off by
the rebel batteries.
About the same time a portion of the Potomac flotilla ascended the
Rappahannock, meeting with but slight opposition, visiting the
towns of Urbana and Tappahannock, and destroying the enemy’s
batteries and huts at Lowry’s Point.
BATTLE OF LEE’S MILLS, VA.
April 16, 1862.
The defence of Yorktown prompted the rebel chiefs to project a

line of batteries and earthworks across the peninsula which has been
rendered so prominent in historic interest by the series of important
events that have occurred between Richmond and Fortress Monroe.
In the course of completing this line, a battery was commenced at a
point on the Warwick road, on the estate of Mrs. Garrow, between
Lee’s Mills and Winn’s Mills. There is here an extensive field, with
woods to the right and left, and in the rear of the road. In front, at
the foot of a gradually descending slope, is a branch of the Warwick
river. The stream had been dammed up between these mills, the
water covering a breadth of from thirty to forty rods, and in the
deepest parts about four and a half feet deep. On the bank was a
rifle-pit, and above it, on the hill, breastworks, with their embrasures
for guns, frowned upon the water.
The arrest of this work, and the expulsion of the rebels, became
necessary, in order to prevent the completion of what might have
become a formidable obstacle. Accordingly, on the morning of the
16th, a party of skirmishers from the Fourth Vermont was thrown
out, and took a position near the enemy’s one gun battery, at the
point named, a New York battery being also advanced at the same
time. Opposite the enemy’s works at that place there was a
considerable space clear of large wood, overgrown with low shrubs
and young pine, and surrounded in every direction except towards
the enemy by a dense forest. Warwick Creek—from four to five feet
deep and about twenty rods wide—separated this field from the rebel
battery. Through the low shrubs and young pine the Vermonters
made their way up to the edge of the stream, and poured upon the
enemy a storm of rifle shot that he soon found it impossible to
withstand. After a few moments of this fire not a man was to be seen
within the enemy’s lines.
Two pieces of the battery—ten-pound Parrots, under Lieutenant
Flynn—then took up a position in the edge of the wood, at one
thousand yards from the enemy’s line, and opened fire. Then the
enemy came bravely up to the business, and responded with the large
gun in his one gun battery, and with two others in a battery behind it.
Lieutenant Stewart, with the second section of the same battery—two
twelve-pound Napoleon guns—was ordered up, with the left section,
under Lieutenant O’Donald. With this reinforcement the fire became
heavy between the artillery on both sides; the Union skirmishers and
numbers of the enemy’s skirmishers also pouring in their fire
whenever they saw an opportunity.
At about ten A. M., after nearly two hours’ sharp firing, the enemy
ceased to respond, not, it was thought, because his guns had been
disabled, but because the Union riflemen held his position so entirely
under fire that it was almost certain death for his men to be seen.
It was now deemed necessary to ascertain the enemy’s force at this
point and his disposition to fight. Upon consultation between
General McClellan and two division commanders, it was determined
to make a more decided demonstration of attack, and, accordingly,
between three and four P. M., three batteries were ordered forward
into the exposed field, and opened fire at about five hundred yards.
This woke the enemy up; he responded warmly for twenty minutes,
and once more relapsed into silence. In no way deceived by this, the
three batteries continued to play upon his position for some minutes
longer, when word was brought to the General of the Vermont
brigade that the creek was easily fordable, at some distance to the
right, and Colonel Hyde, in command of four companies of the
Vermont Third, who had skirmished in advance, was ordered to send
two of his companies across the creek at the point where it was said
to be only knee-deep, advance them to the enemy’s left, and charge
the work in rear. He accordingly sent across companies D and F, and
supported them very closely with companies E and K. Meanwhile the
Federal batteries became silent. No sooner were the Vermonters in
the stream than the water was found to be much deeper than had
been stated; the men went up to their arm-pits, and every charge of

Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco Efficient Concrete Pacheco Torgal All Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco Efficient Concrete Pacheco Torgal All Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Use of recycled plastics in eco-efficient

Use of Recycled Plastics in

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

For information on all Woodhead publications visit our

Publisher: Matthew Deans

1 Introduction to the use of recycled plastics in eco-efﬁcient concrete 1

2 Techniques for separation of plastic wastes 9

3 Hydraulic separation of plastic wastes 39

4 Production of recycled polypropylene (PP) ﬁbers from industrial

4.5 Material characterization 77

5 Fresh properties of concrete containing plastic aggregate 85

6 Mechanical strength of concrete with PVC aggregates 115

7 Characteristics of concrete containing EPS 137

8 Lightweight concrete with polyoleﬁns as aggregates 167

8.4 Use of polyoleﬁns as recycled aggregates in lightweight concrete

9 Properties of concrete with plastic polypropylene aggregates 189

10 Virgin and waste polymer incorporated concrete mixes for

11 Performance of dioctyl terephthalate concrete 249

12 Recycling of PET in asphalt concrete 269

13 Recycling of different plastics in asphalt concrete 287

14 Replacement of stabilizers by recycling plastic in asphalt concrete 307

15 The use of recycled plastic as partial replacement of bitumen

16 Concrete reinforced with metalized plastic waste ﬁbers 349

16.6 Advantages and limitations of the usage of MPW in concrete 364

17 Performance of concrete with PVC ﬁbres 369

18 Recycled waste PET for sustainable ﬁber-reinforced concrete 387

19 Properties of recycled carpet ﬁber reinforced concrete 411

20 Performance of asphalt concrete with plastic ﬁbres 427

20.4 Recycled polyethylene terephthalate ﬁber 429

21 Sustainability of using recycled plastic ﬁber in concrete 441

I. Aghayan Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran

I. Indacoechea-Vega GITECO Research Group, University of Cantabria, Av. de los

Hamid Reza Pakravan Textile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of

1.1 The waste plastic problem

Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efﬁcient Concrete. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102676-2.00001-3

position was made by Adisa Azapagic, at the University of Manchester who

1.2 Outline of the book

Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-efﬁcient Concrete. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102676-2.00002-5

2.2 Plastic waste sources and typologies

Plastic demand by different market sectors (%)

Electrical & electronic

Household, leisure &

Figure 2.1 Plastic demand by different market sectors in 2016.

EU plastic waste generation (%)

Electrical & electronic

Building & construction

Figure 2.2 EU plastic waste generation in 2015.

2.2.2 Typologies of polymers, characteristics, and uses

2.3 The plastic recycling chain

Manual Material/ Size Extrusion &

Table 2.1 Main plastic types and their typical applications

Polyethylene Terephthalate Drink bottles, detergent bottles, clear

Polyvinyl Chloride Packaging for food, medical materials,

European plastics demand by polymer types

PS PET PUR PVC HDPE LDPE PP Others

Figure 2.3 European plastics converter demand by polymer types in 2016.

2.4 Plastic waste separation technologies

2.4.1 Gravity separation

Floating plastic flakes

Sinking plastic flakes

PP, HDPE, LDPE

Float PVC, PET, ABS