Cogent Engineering

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oaen20

Performance of sustainable mortars containing

blast furnace slag and fine concrete waste: an
environmental perspective

Eric A. Ohemeng, Molusiwa S. Ramabodu, Tholang D. Nena & Yana Kancheva

To cite this article: Eric A. Ohemeng, Molusiwa S. Ramabodu, Tholang D. Nena & Yana
Kancheva (2024) Performance of sustainable mortars containing blast furnace slag and fine
concrete waste: an environmental perspective, Cogent Engineering, 11:1, 2313053, DOI:
10.1080/23311916.2024.2313053

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2024.2313053

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 14 Feb 2024.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 135

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaen20
COGENT ENGINEERING
2024, VOL. 11, NO. 1, 2313053
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2024.2313053

MATERIAL ENGINEERING | RESEARCH ARTICLE

Performance of sustainable mortars containing blast furnace slag and fine

concrete waste: an environmental perspective
Eric A. Ohemenga, Molusiwa S. Ramabodua, Tholang D. Nenaa and Yana Kanchevab
a
Department of Construction Management and Quantity Surveying, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa;
b
Department of Applied Geodesy, Faculty of Geodesy, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia, Bulgaria

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

About 9% of the globe’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are attributed to cement produc- Received 7 November 2023
tion. The replacement of cement with blast furnace slag and fine concrete waste (FCW) Revised 27 January 2024
could reduce the CO2 emissions associated with the construction sector. Consequently, the Accepted 27 January 2024
main objective of the current study is to examine the combined effect of blast furnace slag
KEYWORDS
and FCW on mortar manufacturing. The experimental study was conducted in three stages. Fine concrete waste;
In stage I, mortars were prepared using cement-to-sand ratio of 1:3. The cement was substi- sustainable mortars; slag;
tuted with FCW at 0.00, 0.30, 0.60 and 0.75 fractions. From the Stage I results, a mortar mix- cementitious materials
ture prepared with 60% FCW and 40% cement was chosen for the Stage II study. In place of
cement, slag was used in fractions of 0.00, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20 and 0.25. The strengths of REVIEWING EDITOR
the mortars were significantly enhanced when slag was employed as a replacement for Ian Phillip Jones; University
cement. In the final stage of the study, the environmental impact (EI) of producing FCW was of Birmingham; UK
evaluated. The results show that the EI values for producing FCW are far below those of SUBJECTS
cement and slag. For instance, the global warming potentials of producing cement, slag, Testing; Materials Science;
and FCW were 0.951 kgCO2eq, 0.0188 kgCO2eq and 0.0169 kgCO2eq, respectively. In conclu- Civil, Environmental and
sion, the produced mortars provided the specified strength requirements for masonry works Geotechnical Engineering
as well as environmental and economic benefits, making them sustainable.

1. Introduction control mortar was decreased from 6.4 N/mm2 to

The employment of supplementary cementitious
materials (SCMs) as a partial replacement for cement
in mortar production is highly recommendable. From
the literature, about 9% of the globe’s carbon diox-
ide (CO2) emissions are attributed to cement produc-
tion (Boden & Andres, 2017; Mehta & Monteiro,
2014). The substitution of cement with SCMs could
reduce the CO2 emissions associated with cement
manufacturing. Consequently, several studies involv-
ing the utilization of fine concrete waste (FCW) or
slag in cement mortars have been conducted.
The effect of FCW on the strength properties of
recycled mortars was examined by Xianwei and
Zhenyu (2013). The performance of the mortars was
reported to decrease as the percentage of the FCW
increased. The control mortar’s compressive strength
declined by 5.9% when 20% of the cement was
replaced with FCW. Also, the flexural strength of the
4.3 N/mm2 upon 30% substitution of cement with
FCW. Amar (2021) examined the impact of FCW on
mortar’s performance. The author mentioned that
the flexural strength of the control mortar was low-
ered from 9.5 N/mm2 to 7.7 N/mm2 when 20% of the
cement was replaced with FCW. The mechanical
properties of cement mortars containing FCW were
investigated by Moon et al. (2005). The compressive
and flexural strengths of the control mortar were
reduced by 19.8% and 11.4%, respectively, when
one-fifth of the cement was replaced with FCW.
Wu et al. (2021) examined the impact of FCW on
recycled mortars. They reported that the compres-
sive strength of the mortar mixture made with 100%
cement and 80% cement þ 20% FCW were 42.3 N/
mm2 and 31.5 N/mm2, respectively. Kim and Choi
(2012) studied the properties of mortars made with
cement and FCW. The control mortar’s compressive

CONTACT Eric A. Ohemeng ohemengababioeric@yahoo.com Department of Construction Management and Quantity Surveying, University of
Johannesburg, Johannesburg, P.O. Box 17011, South Africa
ß 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow
the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
2 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.
strength was reduced by 54.1% upon 30% replace-
ment of the cement with FCW. Similarly, Thays et al.
(2020) reported that the mortar mixture prepared
with 100% cement was reduced from 49.0 N/mm2 to
30.0 N/mm2 when 30% of the cement was substi-
tuted with FCW.
The percentage reductions in compressive
strength and flexural strength of 10% and 20% FCWs
mortars experienced by various authors are pre-
sented in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. Evidently, the
percentage decrease in both properties went up as
the FCW content rose. The average percentage
reduction in the compressive strength and flexural
strength of the 10% FCW mortars increased from
5.5% and 6.1% to 15.6% and 14.2% for the 20% FCW
mortars, respectively.
Thakur et al. (2016) assessed the effect of slag on
the mechanical properties of mortars. Mortars were
prepared by replacing cement with slag at 0%, 10%,
20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% and 70%. It was reported
that the compressive strength of the mortars
increased for the replacement level of slag up to
50%. The 28-day compressive strength of the control
mortar increased from 45.3 N/mm2 to 47.7 N/mm2 for
a mortar mixture made with 60% cement and 40%
slag. In an investigation by Oleiwi (2021), mortars
were produced by substituting cement with slag at
0%, 20%, 30% and 40% contents. It was mentioned
that the 28-day compressive strength of the control
mortar increased from 35.0 N/mm2 to 44.0 N/mm2
when 30% of the cement was substituted with slag,
representing an increment of 33.3%.
Awang and Aljoumaily (2017) conducted a study
to examine the influence of slag on mortars. Mortars
were prepared by replacing cement with slag at 0%
and 50%. Compressive strength values of 53.1 N/
Figure 1. Percentage reductions in 28-day compressive and flexural strengths of 10% FCW mortars.
mm2 and 54.7 N/mm2 were obtained for mortar mix-
tures prepared with 100% cement and 50% cement
þ 50% slag, respectively. Alakara et al. (2022) pre-
pared geopolymer mortars by substituting FCW with
slag at 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% and 100%. It was men-
tioned that the strength properties of the mortars
increased as the replacement content of slag
increased. Mortar mixtures made with 100% slag and
60% slag þ 40% FCW experienced 28-day compres-
sive strength values of 53.4 N/mm2 and 59.6 N/mm2,
respectively.
Ngo et al. (2022) prepared sustainable mortars by
replacing cement with slag at various ratios. The 28-
day compressive strength of the control mortar was
increased by 11.3% when 15% of the cement was
substituted with slag. Likewise, Sambowo et al.
(2021) reported that the 7-day compressive strength
of the control mortar was increased by 58.7% when
20% of slag was added to it.
The above information shows that experimental
studies on cement mortars containing FCW and slag
are available in the literature. However, studies on
the combined effect of FCW and slag on cement
masonry mortars are yet to be found. Also, studies
on the environmental impact (EI) of producing FCW
are unavailable in the literature. Therefore, the pre-
sent study seeks to fill these gaps in the literature.
1.1. Purpose and process of the study
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the
combined effect of FCW and slag on mortar produc-
tion. Figure 3 outlines the research process. The materi-
als required for the mortar production were collected
and prepared. Testing and characterization of the
materials were done to ascertain their suitability.
 COGENT ENGINEERING 3

Figure 2. Percentage reductions in 28-day compressive and flexural strengths of 20% FCW mortars.

Table 1. Physical properties of the mortar elements.

Type of test Fine aggregate FCW Slag
Silt and clay content (%) 3.05 – –
Bulk density (kg/m3) 1678.50 879 1100
Moisture content (%) 2.29 – –
Fineness modulus 2.78
Specific gravity 2.77 2.65 2.93
Blaine fineness (cm2/g) – 2818.20 4000.00

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Materials
The mortars were made using FCW, slag, river fine
aggregate and water. The fine aggregate’s grade
was consistent with (ASTM C144, 2003). Water
employed for the mortar’s preparation conformed to
BS EN 1008 (2002). The waste concrete used for the
study was secured from a construction site in
Gauteng Province, South Africa. The waste concrete
was broken into smaller pieces using a hammer. The
fine particles of the waste concrete were obtained
by using a sieve size of 0.30 mm. The collected fine
particles were further ground using a ball mill and
sifted through a 0.075 mm sieve. The obtained pow-
ders, which are referred to as FCW in this study,
were put in plastic bags and sealed until the time
for the preparation of the mortars. The physical
properties of the mortar elements are presented in
Table 1.
Figure 3. Flowchart of the research process.

Mortar mixtures were designed. The mixing, casting
and curing of the mortar specimens were carried out.
The properties of the mortars were determined using
the appropriate standards. The EI of the mortar’s ele-
ments was evaluated. Finally, the obtained results were
discussed, and conclusions were drawn.
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Analytical techniques
Microscopic examination was conducted using
TESCAN VEGA3 scanning electron microscopy (SEM),
while laser diffraction particle size analyser Malvern-
Mastersizer 2000 Hydro-G was employed to conduct
the particle size distribution (PSD) analysis. The oxide
4 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.

Table 2. Mixtures of mortars containing cement and FCW. Table 4. Standards for testing the mortar specimens.
Mortar elements (g) Test Standard
Specimen type Cement FCW Fine aggregate Water Flow ASTM C1437 (2007)
Setting time ASTM C191 (2019)
Mix-1 586.0 0.0 1758 351.6 Apparent porosity BS EN 1015-10 (1999)
Mix-2 410.2 175.8 1758 351.6 Dry bulk density BS EN 1015-10 (1999)
Mix-3 234.4 351.6 1758 351.6 Water absorption ASTM C1403 (2000)
Mix-4 146.5 439.5 1758 351.6 Density BS 1881-114 (1983)
Compressive strength ASTM C109 (2013)
Flexural strength BS EN 1015-11 (1999)
Table 3. Mixtures of mortars containing FCW, cement and Splitting tensile strength (St) St ¼ 2 F/pdl
slag.
Mortar elements (g)
Pro
sek et al., 2019). In the case of slag, it can be
Specimen type FCW Cement Slag Fine aggregate Water seen that Al2O3, CaO, MgO and SiO2 account for
Mix-A 351.6 234.4 0.0 1758 351.6
Mix-B 351.6 222.7 11.7 1758 351.6
94.1% of the total oxide.
Mix-C 351.6 211.0 23.4 1758 351.6
Mix-D 351.6 199.2 35.2 1758 351.6
Mix-E 351.6 187.5 46.9 1758 351.6
3.1.2. Microstructure and particle size distribution
Mix-F 351.6 175.8 58.6 1758 351.6 of the materials
The microanalysis of the materials is shown in Figure
composition of the raw materials was determined 5(a–c). Clearly, the cement particles have angular
using a Malvern panalytical spectrophotometer. shapes and smooth surfaces. The FCW particle has
less angular shape compared to that of the cement.
2.2.2. Mortars mixtures, preparation and testing Also, the slag particles consist of several irregular
Tables 2 and 3 show the various mortar mixtures in shapes with smooth surfaces. Figure 6 presents the
Stages 1 and 2, respectively. In Stage 1, the FCW PSD of the materials used to prepare the mortars.
was used to replace cement in the following propor-
tions: 0.00, 0.30, 0.60 and 0.75. For the Stage 2 mor- 3.1.3. Microanalysis of the specimens in Stage 2
tars, the cement was replaced with slag at 0.00, 0.05, Figure 7 shows the microstructure of the mortar
0.10, 0.15, 0.20 and 0.25 fractions. Steel moulds with specimens prepared in Stage 2. Clearly, the spaces in
dimensions of 50 mm  50 mm  50 mm, 40 mm  Mix-A specimen decreased as the slag level
40 mm  160 mm and 100 mm  200 mm cylinders increased up to 15%. However, when the substitu-
were used for casting the mortar specimens for com- tion ratio of slag surpassed 15%, the pores of the
pressive strength, flexural strength and splitting ten- mortar specimens began to increase when compared
sile strength tests, respectively. Three (3) specimens to that of Mix-A. Using an appropriate replacement
were cast for each test. The mortar specimens were level of slag enhanced the bonding ability of the
removed from the moulds 24 h after casting and mortars, while high-volume replacement of slag
cured in water. The specimens were tested on the adversely affected the mortar bonding.
3rd, 7th, 28th and 90th days of curing. Table 4
presents the tests conducted and their correspond-
ing standards. Also, Figure 4 shows the compressive 3.2. Influence of FCW on strength performance
strength, flexural strength and water absorption tests in Stage 1
conducted. The compressive strength values of the mortars are
shown in Figure 8. Apparently, the incorporation of
3. Results and discussion FCW into Mix-1 led to a reduction in compressive
strength, regardless of the curing day. The 28-day
3.1. Material characterization compressive strength of the mortar mixtures Mix-1,
3.1.1. Oxide compositions of the materials Mix-2, Mix-3 and Mix-4 were 39.7 N/mm2, 34.6 N/
The oxide compositions of the materials are pre- mm2, 26.8 N/mm2 and 20.1 N/mm2, respectively. This
sented in Table 5. The oxide results of the cement indicates that the compressive strength of Mix-1
are consistent with those reported by Florea et al. declined by 32.5% when 60% of the cement was
(2014), Kim and Choi (2012), Oksri-Nelfia et al. (2016) substituted with FCW. The reduction in compressive
and Pro
sek et al. (2019). From the table, the FCW strength could be ascribed to the inactive elements
results are in agreement with those found in the lit- found in FCW, which affected the hydration process
erature (Gastaldi et al., 2015; Martinez et al., 2016; of the mortars (Kim & Choi, 2012). The result is
 COGENT ENGINEERING 5

Figure 4. Testing of mortar properties.

Table 5. Oxide composition of the materials. activators such as alkalis react with slag, the glass
Oxide Cement FCW Slag structure is disrupted, resulting in its activation (ACI
Al2O3 5.47 9.05 15.26 233R, 2003; Ohemeng, 2023). The alkalis in cement
BaO 0.00 0.00 0.23
CaO 63.49 23.95 33.35
activate the slag particles for hydration when
Fe2O3 2.98 6.89 0.82 cement is replaced with slag. This chemical reaction
K2O 0.41 0.91 0.95
MgO 1.08 3.21 7.62
causes the early hydration of the mortars containing
MnO 0.12 0.24 1.07 slag to be slowed, thereby retarding the setting
Na2O 0.06 1.55 0.24 time.
P2O5 0.07 0.19 0.00
SiO2 21.05 33.75 37.86
SO3 1.44 1.28 1.91 3.3.3. Influence of slag on density
TiO2 0.64 1.01 0.68
LOI 1.93 17.44 0.00 The effect of slag on the density of the mortars is
shown in Figure 11. Generally, the influence of slag
consistent with other studies found in the literature on the density of the mortars was insignificant. The
28-day density of the mortar mixtures Mix-A, Mix-B
(Moon et al., 2005; Ohemeng et al., 2023).
and Mix-C were 2157.6 kg/m3, 2147.7 kg/m3 and
2148.8 kg/m3, respectively. Nevertheless, the density
3.3. Properties of the mortars in Stage 2 of Mix-A began to decline when the substitution
level of the slag exceeded 15%. This could be
3.3.1. Influence of slag on flow
ascribed to the variations in specific gravity values of
Figure 9 presents the flow of the mortars. The inclu-
the two materials (Table 1).
sion of slag in Mix-A led to an increase in the flow
values. The flow results of the mortar mixtures Mix-
3.3.4. Influence of slag on strength properties
A, Mix-D and Mix-F were 110 mm, 115 mm and
The effect of slag on the strength properties of the
124 mm, respectively. This means that the flow of
mortars is shown in Table 6. Evidently, the employ-
Mix-A was increased by 12.7% when 25% of the
ment of the slag had significant impact on the
cement was replaced with slag. The increase in flow mechanical properties of the mortars, regardless of
could be due to the smooth and hard surface of the the curing day. For instance, the 28-day compressive
slag particle, which reduces its absorption capacity strength of Mix-A was increased from 15.8 N/mm2 to
during initial mixing (Liu et al., 2022). 16.9 N/mm2, 18.3 N/mm2 and 16.7 N/mm2 for mix-
tures Mix-B, Mix-C and Mix-D, respectively. This indi-
3.3.2. Influence of slag on setting time cates that the compressive strength of Mix-A was
Figure 10 depicts the effect of slag on the mortars’ improved when the cement content was replaced
setting times. The replacement of the cement with with slag up to 15%. However, the compressive
slag led to an increase in setting time of the mortars. strength of Mix-A reduced when the content of slag
For instance, the final setting time of Mix-A surpassed 15%. Using an appropriate replacement
increased from 565 mm to 578 mm for Mix-D, repre- ratio of slag enhances mortar strength, but a high-
senting an increment of 2.3%. Slag has latent volume addition of slag leads to a significant reduc-
hydraulicity, which must be activated. When tion in hydration products and strengths (Pro
sek
6 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.
Figure 5. (a) Particle morphology of the cement obtained
by SEM. (b). Particle morphology of the FCW obtained by
SEM. (c). Particle morphology of the slag obtained by SEM.
et al., 2019). Similar trend of results was observed
for the other strength properties. For instance, flex-
ural strength values of 4.2 N/mm2, 4.5 N/mm2 and
4.7 N/mm2 were recorded for Mix-A, Mix-B and Mix-
C, respectively, at curing day 28. The produced mor-
tars have the potential to be used for masonry mor-
tar types M, S, N and O, which require 28-day
compressive strength values of 17.2 N/mm2, 12.4 N/
mm2, 5.2 N/mm2 and 2.4 N/mm2, respectively (ASTM
C270, 2014; Ohemeng & Ekolu, 2019; Ohemeng &
Naghizadeh, 2023).
3.3.5. Significant effect of slag on strength proper-
ties of the mortars at 28 days of curing
Table 7 shows how much slag explains the variations
in compressive strength of the mortars. A coefficient
of determination (R2) ¼ 0.775 was obtained, which
indicates a strong correlation between the compres-
sive strength and slag content. The table also exhib-
its the conventional statistical report comprising an
adjusted R2 ¼ 0.745, F(2, 15) ¼ 23.786, p < .001.
Thus 74.5% of the variation in compressive strength
of the mortars could be explained by the slag con-
tent. It is evident from the table that the effect of
slag content on the compressive strength of the
mortars is statistically significant, since p < .05. Based
on the coefficients given in B-column of Table 7, the
model for predicting the compressive strength of
the mortars is given in Equation (1).
Cs28 ¼ 0:312x − 0:017x2 þ 15:940 (1)
where Cs28 is the 28-day compressive strength and x
is the slag content.
Table 8 illustrates the extent to which slag
accounts for the variation in the mortar’s flexural
strength. The results show a good correlation
between the flexural strength and slag content, with
a coefficient of determination (R2) ¼ 0.701. The
standard statistical report with an adjusted R2 ¼
0.661, F(2, 15) ¼ 17.582, p < .001, is also displayed in
the table. This suggests that the slag content
accounts for 66.1% of the change in the mortars’
flexural strength. The table shows that the influence
of slag content on the mortars’ flexural strength is
statistically significant, since p < .05. Equation (2)
provides the model for determining the mortar’s
flexural strength based on the coefficients provided
in the B-column of Table 8.
Fs28 ¼ 0:063x − 0:003x2 þ 4:246 (2)
where Fs28 is the 28-day flexural strength and x is
the slag content.
The degree to which slag content explains the
changes in the splitting tensile strengths of the mor-
tars is shown in Table 9. The coefficient of determin-
ation (R2) ¼ 0.797 indicates a strong correlation
 COGENT ENGINEERING 7

Figure 6. Particle size distribution of the materials.

Figure 7. Microstructure of the mortar specimens prepared in Stage 2: (a) Mix-A, (b) Mix-B, (c) Mix-C, (d) Mix-D, (e) Mix-E and
(f) Mix-F.
8 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.

Figure 8. Influence of FCW on the compressive strength of the mortars.

Figure 9. Influence of slag on the flow of the mortars.

Figure 10. Influence of slag on setting time of the mortars.

between the splitting tensile strength and slag con-
tent. Additionally shown in the table is the conven-
tional statistical report with an adjusted R2 ¼ 0770,
F(2, 15) ¼ 29.429, p < .001. This indicates that 77.0%
of the variation in the splitting strength of the mor-
tars may be attributed to the slag content. p < .05
suggests that the slag content has a statistically
significant effect on the splitting tensile strength of
the mortars. Equation (3) gives a model for estimat-
ing the splitting tensile strength of the mortars using
the coefficients provided in the B-column of the
table.
St28 ¼ 0:028x − 0:002x2 þ 1:656 (3)
 COGENT ENGINEERING 9

Figure 11. Influence of slag on the density of the mortars.

Table 6. Strength properties of the mortars.

Compressive strength (N/mm2) Flexural strength (N/mm2) Splitting tensile strength (N/mm2)
Specimen type 3 days 7 days 28 days 90 days 3 days 7 days 28 days 90 days 3 days 7 days 28 days 90 days
Mix-A 7.70 10.58 15.75 19.30 1.90 3.30 4.22 5.16 0.45 0.92 1.66 2.19
Mix-B 6.95 10.25 16.94 19.48 1.85 3.20 4.45 5.18 0.43 0.87 1.69 2.24
Mix-C 6.50 10.05 18.25 22.35 1.78 3.12 4.69 5.63 0.41 0.83 1.91 2.56
Mix-D 6.21 9.45 16.65 19.89 1.69 3.05 4.36 5.22 0.38 0.80 1.68 2.22
Mix-E 5.87 9.12 14.17 16.58 1.41 2.98 4.01 4.75 0.35 0.78 1.49 1.99
Mix-F 5.32 8.92 13.57 15.92 1.17 2.81 3.75 4.32 0.32 0.74 1.39 1.86

Table 7. Regression coefficients of compressive strength of the mortars at 28-day curing.

Unstandardized coefficients
Standardized coefficients
Model B SE b t Sig.
Slag content .312 .086 1.585 3.625 .002
Slag content 2 −.017 .003 −2.281 −5.218 .000
Constant 15.940 .457 34.886 .000
R2 ¼ 0.775 (adjusted R2 ¼ 0.745); F(2, 15) ¼ 25.786, p < .001.
 represent exponent or power.

Table 8. Regression coefficients of flexural strength of the mortars at 28-day curing.

Unstandardized coefficients
Standardized coefficients
Model B SE b t Sig.
Slag content 0.063 0.020 1.555 3.088 0.007
Slag content 2 −0.003 0.001 −2.207 −4.384 0.001
Constant 4.246 0.109 39.132 0.000
R2 ¼ 0.701 (adjusted R2 ¼ 0.661); F(2, 15) ¼ 17.582, p < .001.
 represent exponent or power.

Table 9. Regression coefficients of splitting tensile strength of the mortars at 28-day curing.
Unstandardized coefficients
Standardized coefficients
Model B SE b t Sig.
Slag content 0.028 0.008 1.471 3.544 0.003
Slag content 2 −0.002 0.000 −2.204 −5.310 0.000
Constant 1.656 0.043 38.832 0.000
R2 ¼ 0.797 (adjusted R2 ¼ 0.770); F(2, 15) ¼ 29.429, p < .001.
 represent exponent or power.

where St28 is the 28-day splitting tensile strength
and x is the slag content.
3.3.6. Influence of slag on dry density and appar-
ent porosity
The dry bulk density and apparent porosity results
of the mortars are shown in Figure 12. Mortar
mixtures Mix-A, Mix-B, Mix-C and Mix-D recorded dry
bulk density values of 1906.01 kg/m3, 1910.53 kg/m3,
1914.61 kg/m3 and 1908.55 kg/m3, respectively. Also,
the apparent porosity of the mortar mixtures Mix-A,
Mix-B, Mix-C and Mix-D were 19.6%, 19.2%, 18.8%
and 19.5%, respectively. Clearly, the incorporation of
slag up to 15% in Mix-A had no adverse effect on its
10 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.
Figure 12. Influence of slag on dry bulk density and apparent porosity of the mortars.
Figure 13. Water absorption of the mortar mixtures at dif-
ferent durations.
porosity and bulk density. However, lower bulk den-
sities and higher apparent porosity values were
experienced when the substitution level of slag sur-
passed 15%.
3.3.7. Influence of slag on water absorption
The effect of slag content on water absorption of
the mortars is shown in Figure 13. Evidently, the
amount of slag incorporated in Mix-A has a signifi-
cant impact on its water absorption rate. The water
absorption of Mix-A declined for slag content up to
15%. For 4-h immersion, water absorption values of
37.43 g/100 cm2, 36.63 g/100 cm2, 35.76 g/100 cm2
and 36.92 g/100 cm2 were recorded for Mix-A, Mix-B,
Mix-C and Mix-D, respectively. This indicates that the
water absorption of Mix-A was decreased by 4.5%
when 10% of the cement was substituted with slag.
Table 10. Relative share of energy used for processing 1
tonne of the material.
Process %
Sorting process 3.54
Primary crushing 33.22
Conveyor 0.89
Magnetic separation 19.54
Secondary crushing 33.22
Washing or air-sitting 6.64
Screening 2.95
However, as the replacement content of slag
exceeded 15%, higher water absorption values were
recorded when compared to the control mortar. The
trend of the results is supported by the microstruc-
ture analysis of the mortar specimens (Figure 7).
Figure 13 further shows that the specimens experi-
enced rapid water absorption rate beyond 4 h of
immersion (approximately 61% of the total water
absorption).
4. Environmental impact of producing fine
concrete waste
The EI analysis of FCW was done from the angle of
commercial production. Three (3) stages were con-
sidered in the analysis. In the first stage, the EI of
transporting waste concrete from demolition site to
recycling plant located in the Gauteng Province of
South Africa was calculated. Average distance of
58 km and transportation type (a truck of Euro 2
class) were used. For the second stage, the EI for
processing the FCW at the recycling plant was con-
sidered. A dataset for average use of diesel fuel
machine operations was used to model the work of
the equipment at the recycling plant. The total
energy of 2.258 kWh/ton was considered based on
the collected information about the capacities and
working regimes of the machines. The distribution
among processes is shown in Table 10. In the third
 COGENT ENGINEERING 11

Figure 14. Environmental impact of processing fine concrete waste.

Table 11. Environmental impact for producing fine concrete waste without calcination (1 tonne of material).
ADP EP
GWP-fossil ODP POCP Elements Fossil AP Freshwater Marine Terrestrial
Process (kg CO2 eq) (kg CFC11 eq) (kgC2H4eq) (kg Sb-Eq) (MJ) (kgSO2eq) (kgPO4eq) (kgNeq) (molcNeq)
Transport of waste concrete to 15.74 0.000 0.043 0.000 250.533 0.053 0.004 9.04E − 03 0.094
recycling plant
Recycling plant processing: sorting, 0.75 1.61E − 07 0.002 1.14E − 06 10.14 1.28E − 03 2.71E − 05 1.65E − 04 1.83E − 03
crushing, separation,
washing, screening
Sieving of FCW 0.42 4.36E − 09 0.002 4.83E − 07 8.10 5.67E − 03 3.00E − 04 7.50E − 04 7.76E − 03
Total 16.91 1.65E − 07 0.047 1.62E − 06 268.77 0.060 4.33E − 03 9.96E − 03 0.104

stage, the EI for sieving the 75 mm FCW was mod-
elled by the consumption of electrical energy. Also,
the EI for the calcination of the FCW at 500  C for
4 h was determined at this stage. The average elec-
tricity mix for South Africa from the Ecoinvent data-
base was used. The EI indicators were determined in
accordance with (EN 15804, 2012). The Ecoinvent
database version 3.6 and the openLCA software
were used to model the processes. All calculations
were done for 1 tonne of material. The different
environmental elements considered were: abiotic
depletion potential (ADP), global warming potential
(GWP), ozone depletion potential (ODP), photochem-
ical ozone creation potential (POCP), acidification
potential (AP) and eutrophication potential (EP).
Figure 14 and Table 11 show the results for the vari-
ous environmental elements.
4.1. Comparing the environmental impact of
producing the various binders
The EI values for producing 1 kg of FCW determined
from the current study were compared to those of
cement and slag found in the literature (Blengini,
2006; Chen et al., 2010). Figure 15 shows the EI of
the cementitious materials employed in this study.
Obviously, cement has the highest EI values, fol-
lowed by slag and FCW. For instance, the GWPs of
producing cement, slag, and FCW were 0.951
kgCO2eq, 0.0188 kgCO2eq and 0.0169 kgCO2eq,
respectively. The partial replacement of cement with
slag and FCW for the manufacturing of mortars leads
to a reduction in the EI values of the produced mor-
tars, making them eco-friendly.
5. Conclusions
The present study evaluated the effect of FCW and
slag on cement mortars. The FCW and slag were
used to partly replace cement in the mortar produc-
tion. Also, the EI of producing FCW was assessed in
this study. The following major findings are given:
i. The strength properties of the mortars were
enhanced when slag up to 15% was employed.
For instance, the 28-day compressive strength
12 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.
Figure 15. Environmental impact values of producing 1 kg of the various binders.
of the control mortar was increased from 15.8
N/mm2 to 18.3 N/mm2 when 10% of the
cement was replaced with slag.
ii. The produced mortars met the criteria for
masonry mortar types M, S, N and O, which
have a minimum 28-day compressive strength
of 17.2 N/mm2, 12.4 N/mm2, 5.2 N/mm2 and 2.4
N/mm2, respectively. Also, the mortar mixture
containing 60% FCW, 30% cement and 10%
slag was identified as the optimum proportion.
iii. Based on the obtained results, it is recom-
mended that the replacement of cement with
slag in mortars containing high volume of FCW
should not exceed 15%.
iv. The study has shown that the EIs of producing
FCW are far below those of slag and cement.
For example, the ADP of producing cement,
slag and FCW were 0.00399 kgSbeq, 0.00032
kgSbeq and 1.62  10−9 kgSbeq, respectively.
v. The incorporation of slag and FCW in mortars
makes them eco-friendly since the EIs of pro-
ducing slag and FCW are lower than those of
cement.
Acknowledgements
This article is part of the doctoral study of Eric A.
Ohemeng. The authors appreciate the contribution and
support of the technicians at the laboratory of the Civil
Engineering Science Department, University of
Johannesburg.
Author contributions
Eric A. Ohemeng: conceptualization, data curation, formal
analysis, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing
– original draft preparation, and editing. Molusiwa S.
Ramabodu: conceptualization, review, editing, and supervi-
sion. Tholang D. Nena: conceptualization, review, and edit-
ing. Yana Kancheva: conceptualization, review, and editing.
All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Disclosure statement
The authors declare that we have no potential conflict of
interest.
Funding
The authors received no direct funding for this research.
Data availability statement
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current
study are available from the corresponding authors upon
reasonable request.
References
ACI 233R. (2003). Slag cement in concrete and mortar. ACI
committee report. American Concrete Institute (pp. 1–
19).
€ Demir, _I., & G€
Alakara, E. H., Sevim, O., unel, G. (2022). Effect
of waste concrete powder on slag-based sustainable
geopolymer composite mortars. Challenge Journal of
Concrete Research Letters, 13(3), 101–106. https://doi.org/
10.20528/cjcrl.2022.03.003
Amar, B. (2021). Bond behaviour of self-compacting mortar
containing construction and demolition waste under
elevated temperatures. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering,
22, 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-020-00321-4
ASTM C109. (2013). Standard test method for compressive
strength of hydraulic cement mortar. ASTM International.
ASTM C1403. (2000). Standard test method for rate of water
absorption of masonry mortars. ASTM International.

ASTM C1437. (2007). Standard test method for flow of
hydraulic cement mortar. ASTM International.
ASTM C144. (2003). Standard specification for aggregate for
masonry mortar. ASTM International.
ASTM C191. (2019). Standard test methods for time of set-
ting of hydraulic cement by Vicat needle. ASTM
International.
ASTM C270. (2014). Standard specifications for mortar for
unit masonry. ASTM International.
Awang, H., & Aljoumaily, Z. S. (2017). Influence of granu-
lated blast furnace slag on mechanical properties of
foam concrete. Cogent Engineering, 4(1), 1409853.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2017.1409853
Blengini, G. A. (2006). Life cycle assessment tools for sustain-
able development: Case studies for mining and construc-
tion industries in Italy and Portugal [PhD thesis]. Instituto
Superior Tecnico, Universidade Tecnica de Lisboa.
https://fenix.tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Boden, T. A., & Andres, R. J. (2017). Global CO2 emissions
from fossil-fuel burning, cement manufacturing and gas
flaring. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
(CDIAC), Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (pp.
1751–2014). https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2017
BS 1881-114. (1983). Method for determination of density of
hardened concrete. British Standards Institution.
BS EN 1008. (2002). Mixing water for concrete. Specification
for sampling, testing and assessing the suitability of
water, including water recovered from processes in the
concrete industry, as mixing water for concrete. British
Standard Institution.
BS EN 1015-10. (1999). Methods of test for mortar for
masonry: Determination of dry bulk density of hardened
mortar. British Standards Institution.
BS EN 1015-11. (1999). Methods of test for mortar for
masonry: Determination of flexural and compressive
strengths of hardened mortar. British Standards
Institution.
Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., & Ventura, A.
(2010). LCA allocation procedure used as an incitative
method for waste recycling: An application to mineral
additions in concrete. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 54(12), 1231–1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2010.04.001
EN 15804. (2012). Sustainability of construction works –
Environmental product declarations – Core rules for the
product category of construction products. European
Committee for Standardization.
Florea, M. V. A., Ning, Z., & Brouwers, H. J. H. (2014).
Activation of liberated concrete fines and their applica-
tion in mortars. Construction and Building Materials, 50,
1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.09.012
Gastaldi, D., Canonico, F., Capelli, L., Buzzi, L., Boccaleri, E.,
& Irico, S. (2015). An investigation on the recycling of
hydrated cement from concrete demolition waste.
Cement and Concrete Composites, 61, 29–35. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.04.010
Kim, Y. J., & Choi, Y. W. (2012). Utilization of waste con-
crete powder as a substitution material for cement.
Construction and Building Materials, 30, 500–504. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.11.042
Liu, Y., Su, Y., Xu, G., Chen, Y., & You, G. (2022). Research
progress on controlled low-strength materials:
COGENT ENGINEERING 13
Metallurgical waste slag as cementitious materials.
Materials, 15(3), 727. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ma15030727
Martinez, P. S., Cortina, M. G., Martınez, F. F., & Sanchez,
A. R. (2016). Comparative study of three types of fine
recycled aggregates from construction and demolition
waste (CDW), and their use in masonry mortar fabrica-
tion. Journal of Cleaner Production, 118, 162–169. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.059
Mehta, P. K., & Monteiro, P. J. M. (2014). Concrete:
Microstructure, properties, and materials (4th ed.).
McGraw-Hill Education.
Moon, D. J., Moon, H. Y., & Kim, Y. B. (2005). Fundamental
properties of mortar containing waste concrete powder.
Geosystem Engineering, 8(4), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.
1080/12269328.2005.10541243
Ngo, S. H., Nguyen, N. T., & Nguyen, X. H. (2022). Assessing
the effect of GGBFS content on mechanical and durabil-
ity properties of high-strength mortars. Civil Engineering
Journal, 8(5), 938–950. https://doi.org/10.28991/CEJ-
2022-08-05-07
Ohemeng, E. A., & Ekolu, S. O. (2019). Strength prediction
model for cement mortar made with waste LDPE as fine
aggregate. Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based
Materials, 8(4), 228–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/
21650373.2019.1625826
Ohemeng, E. A., & Naghizadeh, A. (2023). Alternative
cleaner production of masonry mortar from fly ash and
waste concrete powder. Construction and Building
Materials, 374, 130859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.con-
buildmat.2023.130859
Ohemeng, E. A., Ramabodu, M. S., & Nena, T. D. (2023).
Utilization of blast furnace slag as an enhancer in
masonry mortars made with thermally treated waste
concrete powder. Buildings, 13(10), 2616. https://doi.org/
10.3390/buildings13102616
Ohemeng, E. A. (2023). Potentials of waste concrete ele-
ments for production of construction materials [PhD the-
sis]. University of Johannesburg. http://hdl.handle.net/
102000/0002
Oksri-Nelfia, L., Mahieux, P. Y., Amiri, O., Turcry, P., & Lux, J.
(2016). Reuse of recycled crushed concrete fines as min-
eral addition in cementitious materials. Materials and
Structures, 49(8), 3239–3251. https://doi.org/10.1617/
s11527-015-0716-1
Oleiwi, S. M. (2021). Compressive strength of mortar with
partial replacement of cement by fly ash and GGBFS.
Diyala Journal of Engineering Sciences, 14(4), 147–156.
https://doi.org/10.24237/djes.2021.14412
Pro
sek, Z., Ne
zerka, V., Hlů
zek, R., Trejbal, J., Tesarek, P., &
Karra’a, G. (2019). Role of lime, fly ash, and slag in
cement pastes containing recycled concrete fines.
Construction and Building Materials, 201, 702–714.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.227
Sambowo, K. A., Ramadhan, M. A., & Igirisa, F. (2021).
Effect of GGBFS on compressive strength, porosity, and
absorption in mortars. IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science, 832, 012012. https://doi.org/10.
1088/1755-1315/832/1/012012
Thakur, L. C., Kumar, S., & Singh, J. P. (2016). Assessment of
the properties of cement and mortar using GGBS.
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,
14 E. A. OHEMENG ET AL.
Engineering and Technology, 5(8), 15224–15231. https://
doi.org/10.15680/IJIRSET.2016.0508098
Thays, C. F. O., Bianca, G. S. D., & Edna, P. (2020). Use of
concrete fine fraction waste as a replacement of
Portland cement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 273,
123126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123126
Wu, H., Yang, D., Xu, J., Liang, C., & Ma, Z. (2021). Water
transport and resistance improvement for the
cementitious composites with eco-friendly powder from
various concrete wastes. Construction and Building
Materials, 290, 123247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.con-
buildmat.2021.123247
Xianwei, MW., & Zhenyu, W. (2013). Effect of ground waste
concrete powder on cement properties. Advances in
Materials Science and Engineering, 918294. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2013/918294