Sustainability of Construction

Materials, Second Edition Khatib

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/sustainability-of-construction-materials-second-editio
n-khatib/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Nanotechnology in eco-efficient construction:

materials, processes and applications Second Edition
Torgal

https://ebookmass.com/product/nanotechnology-in-eco-efficient-
construction-materials-processes-and-applications-second-edition-
torgal/

Olinu2019s Construction: Principles, Materials, and

Methods

https://ebookmass.com/product/olins-construction-principles-
materials-and-methods/

Fundamentals of Building Construction: Materials and

Methods 6th Edition – Ebook PDF Version

https://ebookmass.com/product/fundamentals-of-building-
construction-materials-and-methods-6th-edition-ebook-pdf-version/

Building Construction Materials and Techniques P.

Purushothama Raj

https://ebookmass.com/product/building-construction-materials-
and-techniques-p-purushothama-raj/
Optical properties of materials and their applications
Second Edition Singh

https://ebookmass.com/product/optical-properties-of-materials-
and-their-applications-second-edition-singh/

eTextbook 978-0134454177 Building Construction:

Principles Materials and Systems (3rd Edition)

https://ebookmass.com/product/etextbook-978-0134454177-building-
construction-principles-materials-and-systems-3rd-edition/

Sustainable Construction Materials: Copper Slag 1st

Edition Ravindra K. Dhir Obe

https://ebookmass.com/product/sustainable-construction-materials-
copper-slag-1st-edition-ravindra-k-dhir-obe/

Handbook for Building Construction: Administration,

Materials, Design, and Safety Clifford J Schexnayder

https://ebookmass.com/product/handbook-for-building-construction-
administration-materials-design-and-safety-clifford-j-
schexnayder/

Handbook for Building Construction: Administration,

Materials, Design, and Safety 1st Edition Schexnayder

https://ebookmass.com/product/handbook-for-building-construction-
administration-materials-design-and-safety-1st-edition-
schexnayder/
Sustainable Construction Materials
Related titles
Sustainability of Construction Materials, 2nd Edition
(ISBN: 978-0-08-100995-6)
Nonconventional and Vernacular Construction Materials
(ISBN: 978-0-08-100871-3)
Characteristics and Uses of Steel Slag in Construction
(ISBN: 978-0-08-100976-5)
Woodhead Publishing Series in Civil
and Structural Engineering

Sustainable Construction
Materials: Sewage
Sludge Ash

Ravindra K. Dhir OBE

Gurmel S. Ghataora
Ciarán J. Lynn

AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • CAMBRIDGE • HEIDELBERG

LONDON • NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO
SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO
Woodhead Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier
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 © 2017 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 catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-08-100987-1 (print)

ISBN: 978-0-08-100989-5 (online)

For information on all Woodhead Publishing publications

visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/

Publisher: Matthew Deans

Acquisition Editor: Gwen Jones
Editorial Project Manager: Charlotte Cockle
Production Project Manager: Poulouse Joseph
Designer: Alan Studholme

Typeset by TNQ Books and Journals

 This book is dedicated to
Singapore
where it all began
&
Our families
for their unwavering support
This page intentionally left blank

     
Contents

Author Profiles xi
Prefacexiii

1 Introduction 1
Synopsis 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Sustainable Construction Materials 2
1.3 Sewage Sludge Ash 5
1.4 Layout and Contents 6
References 7

2 Methodology 9
Synopsis 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Sourcing and Appraisal of Literature 10
2.3 Building the Data Matrix 19
2.4 Analysis, Evaluation and Modelling of Data 19
2.5 Dissemination 23
2.6 Conclusions 23
References 23

3 Sewage Sludge Ash Production 25

Synopsis 25
3.1 Introduction 25
3.2 Sewage Sludge 26
3.3 Incineration 36
3.4 Phosphorus Recovery 40
3.5 Conclusions 47
References 48

4 Sewage Sludge Ash Characteristics 69

Synopsis 69
4.1 Introduction 69
4.2 Physical Characteristics 70
4.3 Chemical Characteristics 77
viii Contents

4.4 Engineering Characteristics 91

4.5 Conclusions 93
References 95

5 Concrete-Related Applications 111

Synopsis 111
5.1 Introduction 111
5.2 Raw Feed in Cement Clinker Production 113
5.3 Cement Component 116
5.4 Aggregate 119
5.5 Mortar and Concrete 122
5.6 Lightweight Aggregate Concrete 136
5.7 Blocks 139
5.8 Aerated Concrete 140
5.9 Foamed Concrete 143
5.10 Controlled Low-Strength Materials 144
5.11 Environmental Assessment 146
5.12 Case Studies 148
5.13 Conclusions 149
References 151

6 Ceramic Applications 159

Synopsis 159
6.1 Introduction 159
6.2 General Ceramics 160
6.3 Bricks 164
6.4 Tiles 168
6.5 Glass-Ceramics 173
6.6 Environmental Assessment 176
6.7 Case Studies 178
6.8 Conclusions 179
References 180

7 Geotechnical Applications 185

Synopsis 185
7.1 Introduction 185
7.2 Geotechnical Properties 186
7.3 Soil Stabilisation 190
7.4 Fill Material 201
7.5 Environmental Assessment 202
7.6 Case Studies 202
7.7 Conclusions 203
References 204
Contents ix

8 Road Pavements 209

Synopsis 209
8.1 Introduction 209
8.2 Unbound Applications 210
8.3 Hydraulically Bound Applications 212
8.4 Bituminous Bound Applications 214
8.5 Environmental Assessment 218
8.6 Case Studies 219
8.7 Conclusions 219
References 221

9 Environmental Assessment, Case Studies and Standards 225

Synopsis 225
9.1 Introduction 225
9.2 Environmental Assessment 226
9.3 Case Studies 242
9.4 Standards and Specifications 247
9.5 Conclusions 249
References 251

10 Epilogue 261

Index265
This page intentionally left blank

     
Author Profiles

Ravindra Kumar Dhir OBE is a professor of concrete engineering, University of

Birmingham, UK; adjunct professor at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, and emeritus
professor of concrete technology, University of Dundee, UK, where he held the
position of founding director of the Concrete Technology Unit (1998–2008) and
developed it into an internationally acknowledged Centre of Excellence. His approach
to research is visionary and creative, and by working closely with industry, he ensured
a meaningful dissemination of his research into practice. He won many awards and
honours, including the Order of the British Empire for services to concrete technology
from the Queen (1989), Secretary of State for Trade and Industry for innovative
partnership with industry (1989, 1990) and honorary fellowships from the Institute
of Concrete Technology, UK; Indian Concrete Institute and Construction Chemicals
Manufacturers’ Association, India. He served on numerous technical committees,
including as president of the Concrete Society (2009–10) and on the editorial board of
the Magazine of Concrete Research.
Dr Gurmel S. Ghataora is a senior lecturer at the University of Birmingham, UK,
with over 40 years’ experience in the geotechnical engineering industry and academia.
He has been at the university for over 25 years, where, in addition to his teaching, he
is the head of postgraduate admissions for all programmes taught in civil engineering.
He has supervised over 50 research students and authored over 180 articles. His
interests include geotechnics of earth roads and railways and sustainable construction
materials. Amongst his many inventions are zero-compaction trench backfill made
from as-dug materials, fibre reinforcement of clayey soils, improving the stiffness
of railway tracks without removing the track, a novel railway drainage system and
remediating acidity in colliery spoil using waste materials. Current studies include
the durability of concrete made with recycled concrete aggregate and municipal
incinerated bottom ash. He is a member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and
Mining and sits on two Transportation Research Board committees.
Ciarán J. Lynn, PhD, is a doctoral researcher, University of Birmingham, UK. He
received his MSc in Engineering from Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, and BE in Civil
Engineering from University College Dublin, Ireland. His research interests lie in the
areas of sustainable construction and the appropriate use of secondary and recycled
materials, including in concrete, geotechnics, road pavements and ceramic applications.
He is an active contributor in these areas, including publications on the use and
environmental assessment of incinerated ashes as construction materials. He is currently
involved in a number of ongoing projects focusing on sustainable concrete construction.
This page intentionally left blank

     
Preface

Sustainability is now commonly referred to in the construction sector, zero waste

scenarios are frequently floated, a great deal of research has been undertaken in the
use of recycled and secondary materials (RSM) and standards and specifications are
becoming more sympathetic to their adoption; however, a clear view of the potential for
the use of RSM and how this may affect performance remains to be established. This
is important and needed to absorb RSM within the present hierarchy of construction
materials.
The use of RSM requires a clear understanding of their characteristics and their
potential for use in required applications. This can be problematic as the variability of
the material can be high, though this is not unusual, as well-established materials such
as Portland cement, naturally occurring sand and gravel and crushed-rock aggregates
are also known for their high variation at individual plants and even more so between
plants. Material processing and design procedures can help to minimise variability.
Why then is the construction industry slow to adopt the use of the new breed of waste
materials, such as recycled aggregates arising from demolition and excavation waste,
copper slag from metal extraction processes, incinerated bottom ashes from municipal
solid waste and sewage sludge and glass cullet from used domestic and industrial
waste? It can be argued that the inertia in accepting the use of RSM is due mainly to
two reasons: first, research has not come together to exploit the present knowledge
of RSM and their potential use and, second, a robust case for the value-added use of
RSM has not yet been made.
This book, as part of a series of five, brings together the global research information
published in English that deals with sewage sludge ash production and properties and its
potential for use as cement and aggregate in concrete, ceramics, geotechnical and road
pavement applications, including related case studies, standards and environmental
impacts. The data analysed and evaluated for the book were sourced from 525
publications contributed by 1107 authors, from 442 institutions in 48 countries, over a
time period from 1970 to 2016.
The main purpose of the book, which is aimed at academics, researchers, design
engineers, specifiers and contractors and is structured in an incisive and easy to
follow manner, is to bring out what is known, how the material can be potentially
used, and at the same time, avoid unnecessary repetitive research and wasting of
resources.
xiv Preface

In completing this work, the authors gratefully acknowledge the help of many
individuals at different stages of the work, but would like particularly to thank Edwin
Trout of the Concrete Society, UK, for his help with sourcing of the literature and
Chao Qun Lye for his help with the preparation of this book.

Ravindra K. Dhir OBE

Gurmel S. Ghataora
Ciarán J. Lynn
Introduction
1
Main Headings
• Sustainable construction materials
• Sewage sludge ash
• Layout and contents

Synopsis
Experience, collaborative industrial research projects and their dissemination to the
point of use have established the grounds for this series of five books and are described
in this chapter. The role of sustainable construction materials in achieving sustainable
development is highlighted. This book, the second in the series, deals with sewage sludge
ash. An introduction to the material is provided, along with a brief description of the
novel procedures of systematic analysis and evaluation used in developing the work. The
structure of the book, in terms of the layout and contents, is also described.

Keywords: Sustainable development, Sustainable construction materials, Sewage sludge

ash, Book layout and contents.

1.1  Background
The basis of this book stems from years of active research in close collaboration
with industry and commitment to dissemination, as well as an active and decisive
involvement in promoting the use of waste materials in the construction sector. The
work has involved the undertaking of carefully planned and focused research to
address some of the most challenging issues over the years, including sustainability in
construction in general (Whyte et al., 2005), the sustainable use of natural resources
to reduce CO2 emissions (Dhir et al., 2004a, 2006) and the use of recycling of waste
materials to conserve natural resources (Limbachiya et al., 2000; Dyer and Dhir, 2001;
Paine et al., 2002; Dhir, 2006; Dyer et al., 2006; Paine and Dhir, 2010a). Of particular
note, an outreach programme was launched to share and transfer knowledge, in the
form of organising seminars, workshops and conferences (Dhir and Green, 1990; Dhir
et al., 2008), and in doing so, a centre for the advancement of small- to medium-size
enterprises in the construction sector was established. This also included the initiation
of the globalisation of concrete research and the forming of the UK–India (Newlands
and Dhir, 2011) and Ireland–India research collaboration groups in 2008 and 2012,
respectively.

Sustainable Construction Materials: Sewage Sludge Ash. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100987-1.00001-9

Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 Sustainable Construction Materials: Sewage Sludge Ash

Working at the forefront of the cutting-edge research, undertaken in close

partnership with a wide industrial base, also brought to light the fragmented and
therefore often ineffective nature of the research undertaken. Indeed, in the area of
sustainable construction materials, this has stifled the rate of progress in realising
the potential for developing greater adoption of these materials. As a response to
this, an approach has been developed to bring together and systematically analyse
and evaluate the published data in the global literature, to better understand and
utilise the information.
Using this systematic approach, the following selected few successful studies were
found:
• On the carbonation and carbonation-induced corrosion of steel reinforcement of concrete
made with cement incorporating fly ash and complying with European Standard EN 197-1
(2011), the analysis and evaluation of global data revealed some challenging facts about the
performance of concrete and its sustainability impact that had hitherto not generally been
appreciated (Lye et al., 2015).
• 
Similarly, another classic study (Lynn et al., 2016) based on systematic analysis and
evaluation of globally published data confirmed the fitness for use of municipal solid waste
incinerated bottom ash as an aggregate in road pavement and geotechnical applications.
• A study undertaken by Silva et al. (2014) on a similar basis, using the globally published
literature, provided a method for classifying recycled aggregates derived from construction
demolition waste for use in concrete, which could help with their certification and boost
stakeholders’ confidence in their use.

The process of bringing together globally published literature on recycled and

secondary materials and undertaking a systematic analysis and evaluation of the data
is undoubtedly a very powerful tool for characterising the materials and establishing
their potential applications and engineering performance across disciplines, as well
as addressing the important environmental impacts and sustainability issues. This
approach has been adopted to develop this book as part of a series of five dealing with
sustainable construction materials.
This work should serve as a useful resource for academics, researchers and
practitioners, providing an up-to-date, comprehensive view of the research on the
subject of sewage sludge ash (SSA) and its use in construction, in concrete, geotechnics
and road pavement applications, as well as the associated environmental impacts,
case studies and issues related to standards and specifications, where necessary. Of
equal importance, this work should help to reduce wasteful repetitive studies and also
potentially spark new ideas and useful projects in areas of need.

1.2  Sustainable Construction Materials

Whilst it could be argued that the term ‘sustainability’ is now generally recognised,
the wider implications of this are still difficult to comprehend. Alternatively,
‘sustainable development’ appears to be a much more straightforward and graspable
Introduction 3

expression which is easier to appreciate. It is defined in the prominent United Nations’

Brundtland report (1987) as ‘development which meets the need of the present without
compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs’.
In this context, the ever growing demand for building of infrastructure is fast assuming
a central stage in national development, as a major consumer of natural sources of
non-renewal materials and energy. This development is expected to increasingly affect
the environment in terms of CO2 emissions, which can lead to subsequent climate
change and temperature increases at the earth’s surface, as well as having a major
influence on social and economic conditions. The possible consequences in this respect
are frightening, potentially leading ultimately to famine, floods, mass movement of
people and the destruction of species (Stern, 2006). As such, it is not surprising that
governments across the world look to the construction industry to play a major role in
addressing the issues relating to sustainable development and therefore sustainability.
Along with the more efficient design, construction and operation of buildings, the growing
use of recycled and secondary materials, which, for obvious reasons, are increasingly being
addressed as sustainable construction materials, can also help to lower the environmental
impact of construction work. For example, minimising the use of Portland cement, for
which the current annual global production is around 4.1 billion tonnes (see Figure 1.1),
can lead to significant reductions in CO2 emissions. The use of SSA as part of the raw feed
in the production of Portland cement clinker and in ground form as a component of cement
is discussed in Chapter 5. Whilst this can make a modest contribution to reducing CO2
emissions, the similar use of other waste materials can combine with it to collectively make
a significant contribution. Indeed, in this respect, EN 197-1 (2011) on common cements

4500
Total
4000 China
PRODUCTION (million tonnes)

3500 India
USA
3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

YEAR
Figure 1.1 World cement production from 1994 to 2015.
Data taken from USGS (2016).
4 Sustainable Construction Materials: Sewage Sludge Ash

Recycled Aggregates Re-used Aggregates

5.5% 0.5%
Marine Aggregates Manufactured Aggregates
1.5% 1.5%

Sand & Gravel Total: Crushed Rock

38% 3.8 billion tonnes 53%

Figure 1.2 Aggregate production in 38 European countries and Israel in 2014.

Data taken from UEPG (2016).

recognises several by-product materials as constituent materials of cement. Furthermore,

it is interesting to note the total cement production in China, shown in Figure 1.1, which
brings home the threat to sustainability that emerging countries may be in the future as the
development of infrastructure in these countries, which account for nearly two-thirds of the
world, begins to move full speed ahead.
As another example, minimising the consumption of natural aggregates, for which the
annual global production is around 50 billion tonnes as of this writing and forecasted
to increase further at the rate of 5% per annum, can be realised by developing the use
of recycled and secondary aggregates (RSAs) in construction. Whilst this is perhaps
generally appreciated, the pertinent question is how to change the mindset and accelerate
the process of routinely specifying RSAs in the construction industry. Figure 1.2 clearly
emphasises the need to develop the use of RSA materials. In this context, the quantity of
manufactured aggregates used in 38 European nations amounts to only 1.5% of the total
estimated production of RSAs. The numbers become even more daunting when one
considers that the corresponding share of recycled aggregates arising from construction
demolition and excavation waste used in this region stands at only 5.5%.
It is recognised that national standards the world over are moving towards facilitating
the use of RSAs in construction and the performance-based approach is being advanced
(Paine and Dhir, 2010b; Collery et al., 2015). Figure 1.3 emphasises the pertinent
point of sustainability as a simple workable philosophy that is easy to understand and
points the way forward in adopting the sustainable use of construction materials by
matching the material quality with the application demands.
Introduction 5

High grade

High grade
Excellent

Excellent
Aggregate Quality

Aggregate Quality
Application

Application
Low grade

Low grade
Poor

Poor
(a) General Practice (b) Sustainable Practice
Figure 1.3 General and sustainable practices in dealing with aggregates.
Adapted from Dhir et al. (2004b).

1.3  Sewage Sludge Ash

SSA is a residue produced from the incineration of sewage sludge, with the
original sewage sludge coming as a by-product of wastewater treatment. Owing to
increasing population growth and ever improving sanitation and living standards,
the quantity of this sludge to manage is on the rise. Disposal at sea, which has
been popular in the past, is now banned (European Community, 1991); disposal in
landfills is also being deterred, with mandatory targets set to reduce the quantity
of waste landfilled (European Community, 1999), and spreading on agricultural
lands has been limited by cautious approaches adopted by countries over health
and safety concerns. This has forced the management of the sludge into other
areas such as incineration and recycling, and this shift is expected to continue in
the future.
Data on the production of the ash itself are lacking, though the latest figures
from the Eurostat (2015) database revealed that 11 Mt of sewage sludge has
been produced per annum in 28 European countries. Of these countries, 20 were
reported to be incinerating the material to some extent, with Germany having
the highest quantity of sludge incinerated (1.3 Mt dry matter per annum), and
The Netherlands, Switzerland and Belgium having the highest rates of sludge
incineration at 99%, 97% and 83%, respectively. Overall, 22% of the total sludge
disposed of in these countries was incinerated. The incineration process is known
to lead to an approximately 90% reduction in the volume of the waste and as such,
it is estimated that approximately 240 kt of SSA is generated per annum in these
European countries.
Whilst not in the same league as other waste streams such as municipal incinerator
bottom ash, SSA still presents a significant management challenge at the local level. It
must also be considered that a sustainable society can be truly achieved only through
developing the appropriate use of all so-called ‘waste’ materials, including SSA, as
valuable resources.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 III
STRENGTH OF WELLINGTON’S ARMY
DURING AND AFTER THE BURGOS RETREAT

The subjoined statistics show the marching strength of the Anglo-

Portuguese divisions of Wellington’s army at the commencement of
the Burgos Retreat (Oct. 23) and some days after its termination
(Nov. 29). There had been, immediately after the army reached
Ciudad Rodrigo, certain transferences of units from one division to
another, which are duly noted. The figures give only rank and file; to
get the fighting strength one-eighth should be added to cover
officers, sergeants, and drummers.
Present Present
under arms. under arms.
Oct. 23. Nov. 29.
1st Cavalry Division 2,827 2,909 (2nd Hussars K.G.L.
has joined.)
2nd Cavalry Division 1,947 1,625 (2nd Hussars K.G.L.
has left.)
1st Division 3,970 4,002 (1st & 3rd battalions
First
Guards have joined,
but
Stirling’s brigade has
been
transferred to the 6th
Division.)
2nd Division 7,915 6,591
3rd Division 4,229 3,860 (2/87th from Cadiz has
joined.)
4th Division 4,487 3,861 (1/82nd has joined.)
5th Division 3,638 3,732 (2/47th from Cadiz has
joined.)
6th Division 3,380 5,228 (The division has been
joined
by Stirling’s brigade
and also
by the 1/91st.)
7th Division 4,298 3,358
Light Division 3,428 3,775 (2 companies 3/95th
and the
20th Portuguese
have joined.)
Hamilton’s Portuguese 4,719 4,076
Division
Pack’s Portuguese 1,681 1,105
Brigade
Bradford’s Portuguese 1,645 881
Brigade
48,124 45,003
Artillery, Train, Staff 2,500 2,300
Corps, &c.
The fall in numbers would have been much greater but for the
joining of Skerrett’s force from Cadiz (3/1st Guards, 2/47th, 2/87th,
20th Portuguese, and two companies 3/95th) and of the 1/1st
Guards and 1/91st from England, and the 1/82nd from Gibraltar—in
all, nearly 6,000 men.
It may be worth while to give here the statistics of the Spanish
troops which were acting with Wellington’s and Hill’s armies during
this period. They were by their October morning states:

‘6th Army’ or Galicians (Santocildes):

1st Division (Barcena) 6,810 (5 of the 15 battalions of this division
were not at the front.)
2nd Division (Cabrera) 4,749
3rd Division (Losada) 4,213
Cavalry Brigade (Figuelmonde) 1,356 (5 of the 9 squadrons of this brigade
were not at the front.)
5th Army (Estremadurans and Castilian):
Morillo’s Division 2,371 (Acting with Hill’s Corps.)
Carlos de España’s Division 3,809 (ditto.)
Penne Villemur’s cavalry 992 (ditto.)
Julian Sanchez’s cavalry 1,159 (Acting with Main Army.)
Total Spanish troops 25,459
 IV
LOSSES IN THE BURGOS RETREAT

The casualties in action between October 23rd and November

19th are easily ascertainable, and quite moderate. But the loss in
‘missing’ by the capture of stragglers, marauders, and footsore men,
was much higher than is generally known. I believe that the annexed
table, from the morning state of November 29th, is now published for
the first time. It gives only the rank and file missing, but these are
almost the whole list: officers and sergeants did not straggle or drop
behind like the privates. I believe that the total of officers missing
was 25, of sergeants 56 British and 29 Portuguese: we have also to
add 43 British and 32 Portuguese drummers, &c., to the general list,
which runs as follows:
British. Portuguese. Total.
1st Cavalry Division 192 — 192
2nd Cavalry Division 101 8 109
1st Division Infantry 283 — 283
2nd Division Infantry 302 260 562
3rd Division Infantry 184 230 414
4th Division Infantry 308 19 327
5th Division Infantry 453 359 812
6th Division Infantry 96 74 170
7th Division Infantry 357 243 600
Light Division Infantry 92 163 253
Portuguese. Hamilton’s Division — 221 221
Portuguese. Pack’s Brigade — 293 293
Portuguese. Bradford’s Brigade — 514 514
Total 2,368 2,374 4,752
 The abnormally high totals of the 5th Division and 7th Division
are to be accounted for in different ways. The former had 150
prisoners taken in action on the day of the combat of Villa Muriel
(October 25); the latter contained the two battalions that always gave
a high percentage of deserters, the foreign regiments of Brunswick-
Oels and Chasseurs Britanniques. It will be noted that the 2nd
Division has also a high total, but as it had nearly double the
numbers of any other division (7,500 men to an average 4,000 for
the others) it did not lose out of proportion to its strength. It will be
noted that the Portuguese lost more heavily in relation to their total
numbers than the British—their ‘missing’ were about the same as
those of the British, but they only had about 20,000 rank and file in
the field as against about 30,000 British. This excessive loss in
missing was due entirely to the fact that the cold and rain of the last
ten days of the retreat told much more heavily upon them. They were
not so well clothed or fed as the British, and fell behind from
exhaustion. Bradford’s brigade, though never seriously in action, lost
500 men out of 1,600 by the roadside, much the heaviest percentage
in the whole army.
The losses in killed and wounded as opposed to ‘missing’ seem
to make up the following moderate figures, to which the heavy
fighting about Venta del Pozo and Villa Muriel during the first days of
the retreat made much the heaviest contribution.
Killed: 9 officers, 189 men. Wounded: 54 officers, 699 men—i. e.
the total of 951. This does not, of course, include the prisoners taken
at Venta del Pozo or Villa Muriel, who are counted among the
‘missing’ reckoned in the prefixed table. The losses in killed and
wounded at Alba de Tormes and San Muñoz are less than might
have been expected; those in the other skirmishes at Valladolid,
Tordesillas, &c., quite negligible.
 V
THE CAMPAIGN OF CASTALLA: APRIL 1813

Sir John Murray reports his army to have consisted of the

following elements:

Infantry: British, German, Anglo-Italian, and

Calabrese 8,274 officers men
Sicilian ‘Estero’ Regiment 1,136 ” ”
Whittingham’s Spanish Division (6
batts.) 3,901 ” ”
Roche’s Spanish Division (5 batts.) 4,019 ” ”
Cavalry: British, Spanish, and Sicilian 886 ” ”
Artillery, &c. 500 ” ”
18,716 ” ”
The units appear to have been brigaded as follows:
Advance Guard, General Adam: 2/27th, 1st Italian Levy, Calabrese
Free Corps, Rifle Companies of 3rd and 8th K.G.L.
J. Mackenzie’s Division: 1/27th, 4th and 6th Line K.G.L., Sicilian
Estero Regiment (2 batts.).
Clinton’s Division: 1/10th, 1/58th, 1/81st, De Roll-Dillon, 2nd Italian
Levy.
Cavalry: 20th Light Dragoon (2 squadrons), Foreign Hussars (1
troop), 1st Sicilian Cavalry, four Spanish squadrons[1062].
Whittingham’s Spaniards: Cordova, Mallorca, Guadalajara, 2nd of
Burgos, 5th Grenadiers, 2nd of Murcia.
Roche’s Spaniards: Volunteers of Aragon, Alicante, Chinchilla,
Volunteers of Valencia, Canarias.
Artillery: British companies of Holcombe, Thompson, Williamson and
Lacy; Portuguese company of Cox, one Sicilian company (three
of these companies were holding the forts of Alicante).
 VI
SUCHET’S ARMY AT CASTALLA: APRIL 13,
1813
[Return of April 1.]

Officers. Men. Total.

1st Division, General Robert [for Musnier, absent]:
1st Léger (2 batts.) 38 1,443 1,481
114th Ligne (2 batts.) 36 1,498 1,534
121st Ligne (2 batts.) 34 1,252 1,286
3rd Léger (2 batts.)[1063] 16 767 783
124 4,960 5,084
2nd Division, General Harispe:
7th Ligne (2 batts.) 31 1,298 1,329
44th Ligne (2 batts.) 26 1,160 1,186
116th Ligne (2 batts.) 35 1,502 1,537
92 3,960 4,052
3rd Division, General Habert:
14th Ligne (2 batts.) 42 1,189 1,231
1/16th Ligne[1064] 21 614 635
1/117th Ligne[1064] 27 829 856
90 2,632 2,722
Cavalry, General Boussard:
Two squadrons 4th Hussars 21 408 429
13th Cuirassiers 25 523 548
24th Dragoons (2 squadrons) 20 427 447
66 1,358 1,424
Artillery: four batteries 10 282 292
Total 376 13,192 13,568
 VII
BIAR AND CASTALLA LOSSES:
APRIL 12-13, 1813

Killed. Wounded. Missing.

Off. Men. Off. Men. Off. Men. Total.
Staff 1 — 2 — — — 3
Adam’s Brigade:
2/27th Foot — 18 2 90 — 2 112
1st Italian Levy 23 3 49 — 28 103
Calabrese Free Corps — 8 2 49 — — 59
Rifle Companies 3rd & 8th
K.G.L. 1 7 2 23 — 2 35
Mackenzie’s Division:
1/27th Foot — 2 — 18 — — 20
4th Line K.G.L. — 3 — 9 — — 12
6th Line K.G.L. — 1 — 5 — — 6
Sicilian ‘Estero’ Regiment — 1 — 8 — — 9
Clinton’s Division:
1/58th Foot — 1 — 5 — — 6
De Roll-Dillon — 4 1 20 — 9 34
Whittingham’s Spanish Division:
Cordova, Mallorca,
Guadalajara, 2nd Burgos,
5th Grenadiers, 2nd of
Murcia 2 73 4 183 — — 262
20th Light Dragoons — — — 1 — — 1
Sicilian Cavalry — — — — — 1 1
R.A. and drivers — — — 5 — — 5
Portuguese Artillery — — — 3 — — 3
Total 4 141 16 468 — 42 671
 VIII
WELLINGTON’S ARMY IN THE VITTORIA
CAMPAIGN
MARCHING STRENGTH, MAY 25, 1813[1065]

Cavalry
Officers. Men. Total.
R. Hill’s Brigade: 1st & 2nd Life Guards, Horse
Guards 42 828 870
Ponsonby’s Brigade: 5th Dragoon Guards, 3rd &
4th Dragoons 61 1,177 1,238
G. Anson’s Brigade: 12th & 16th Light Dragoons 39 780 819
Long’s Brigade: 13th Light Dragoons 20 374 394
V. Alten’s Brigade: 14th Light Dragoons, 1st
Hussars K.G.L. 49 956 1,005
Bock’s Brigade: 1st & 2nd Dragoons K.G.L. 38 594 632
Fane’s Brigade: 3rd Dragoon Guards, 1st
Dragoons 42 800 842
Grant’s Brigade: 10th, 15th, 18th Hussars 63 1,561 1,624
D’Urban’s Portuguese Brigade: 1st, 11th, 12th
Cavalry — 685 685
6th Portuguese Cavalry (Campbell) — 208 208
Cavalry Total 354 7,963 8,317

Infantry
Officers. Men. Total.
1st Division, General Howard:[1066]
Stopford’s Brigade: 1st Coldstream, 1st Scots
Guards, one company 5/60th 56 1,672
4,854
Halkett’s Brigade: 1st, 2nd, 5th Line K.G.L., 1st
& 2nd Light K.G.L. 133 2,993
2nd Division, Sir Rowland Hill:
Cadogan’s Brigade: 1/50th, 1/71st, 1/92nd, one
company 5/60th 120 2,657
Byng’s Brigade: 1/3rd, 1/57th, 1st Prov.
Batt.,[1067] one company 5/60th 131 2,334
10,834
O’Callaghan’s Brigade: 1/28th, 2/34th, 1/39th,
one company 5/60th 122 2,408
Ashworth’s Portuguese: 6th & 18th Line, 6th
Caçadores — 3,062
3rd Division, General Sir Thomas Picton:
Brisbane’s Brigade: 1/45th, 74th, 1/88th, three
companies 5/60th 125 2,598
Colville’s Brigade: 1/5th, 2/83rd, 2/87th, 94th 120 2,156 7,437
Power’s Portuguese Brigade: 9th & 21st Line,
11th Caçadores — 2,460
4th Division, General Sir G. Lowry Cole:
W. Anson’s Brigade: 3/27th, 1/40th, 1/48th, 2nd
Prov. Batt.,[1068] one company 5/60th 139 2,796
Skerrett’s Brigade: 1/7th, 20th, 1/23rd, one
7,816
company Brunswick 123 1,926
Stubbs’s Portuguese Brigade: 11th & 23rd Line,
7th Caçadores — 2,842
5th Division, General Oswald [for General Leith]:
Hay’s Brigade: 3/1st, 1/9th, 1/38th, one
company Brunswick 109 2,183
Robinson’s Brigade: 1/4th, 2/47th, 2/59th, one
6,725
company Brunswick 100 1,961
Spry’s Portuguese Brigade: 3rd & 15th Line,
8th Caçadores — 2,372
6th Division, General Pakenham [for General Clinton]:
Stirling’s Brigade: 1/42nd, 1/79th, 1/91st, one
company 5/60th 127 2,327
Hinde’s Brigade: 1/11th, 1/32nd, 1/36th, 1/61st 130 2,288 7,347
Madden’s Portuguese Brigade: 8th & 12th Line,
9th Caçadores — 2,475
7th Division, General Lord Dalhousie:
Barnes’s Brigade: 1/6th, 3rd Prov. Batt.[1069], 7,287
nine companies Brunswick-Oels 116 2,206
Grant’s Brigade: 51st, 68th, 1/82nd, Chasseurs 141 2,397
 Britanniques
Lecor’s Portuguese Brigade: 7th & 19th Line,
2nd Caçadores — 2,437
Light Division, General Charles Alten:
Kempt’s Brigade: 1/43rd, 1st & 3rd/95th 98 1,979
Vandeleur’s Brigade: 1/52nd, 2/95th 63 1,399 5,484
Portuguese 17th Line, 1st & 3rd Caçadores — 1,945
Silveira’s Portuguese Division:
Da Costa’s Brigade: 2nd & 14th Line — 2,492
A. Campbell’s Brigade: 4th & 10th Line, 10th 5,287
Caçadores — 2,795
Pack’s Portuguese Brigade: 1st & 16th Line, 4th
Caçadores — 2,297 2,297
Bradford’s Portuguese Brigade: 13th & 24th Line,
5th Caçadores — 2,392 2,392
R.H.A. and Drivers 23 780
Field Artillery, Train, Ammunition column, &c. 100 2,722
K.G.L. Artillery 17 335
Portuguese Artillery — 330
Engineers and Sappers 41 302
Staff Corps 21 126
Wagon Train 37 165

British. Portuguese. Total.

Total Cavalry 7,424 893 8,317
” 1st Division 4,854 — 4,854
” 2nd Division 7,772 3,062 10,834
” 3rd Division 4,977 2,460 7,437
” 4th Division 4,974 2,842 7,816
” 5th Division 4,353 2,372 6,725
” 6th Division 4,872 2,475 7,347
” 7th Division 4,850 2,437 7,287
” Light Division 3,539 1,945 5,484
” Silveira’s Division — 5,287 5,287
” Pack’s and Bradford’s Brigades — 4,689 4,689
” Artillery and Train 3,977 330 4,307
” Engineers, Staff Corps, &c. 892 — 892
52,484 28,792 81,276
 This is, I believe, the first complete return of Wellington’s army in
the Vittoria campaign ever published. My predecessors in Peninsular
history sought in vain for the ‘morning states’ which should have
accompanied Wellington’s dispatches to Lord Bathurst, and which
are mentioned in those dispatches. In previous years, down to
December 1812, they are generally found annexed to the covering
letter, in the bound volumes at the Record Office. I should have fared
no better than other seekers, but for the admirable knowledge of the
contents of the Office possessed by Mr. Leonard Atkinson. He
remembered that there existed some separate packages of ‘morning
states’, which had been divorced from the rest of Wellington’s
sendings, and not bound up with them. When sought, they turned
out to be the missing figures of 1813, tied up unbound between two
covers of cardboard. Mr. Atkinson’s happy discovery enables me to
give the prefixed statistics, which permit us to know Wellington’s
exact strength just as the campaign of Vittoria was starting.
 IX
SPANISH TROOPS UNDER WELLINGTON’S
COMMAND
JUNE-JULY 1813
STATES OF JUNE 1

I. FOURTH ARMY (GENERAL GIRON)

Officers. Men. Total.
Morillo’s Division 172 4,379 4,551
Losada’s Galician Division (6 batts.) 295 5,560 5,855
P. Barcena’s Galician Division (7 batts.) 235 4,908 5,143
Porlier’s Asturian Division (3 batts.) 124 2,284 2,408
Longa’s Division (5 batts.) 130 3,000 3,130
Penne Villemur’s Cavalry (7 regts.) 194 2,434 2,628
Julian Sanchez’s Cavalry (2 regts.) 90 1,200 1,290
Artillery 20 400 420
Total of June 1 1,263 24,165 25,425

II. LEFT IN CASTILE, REJOINED ON JULY 28

Carlos de España’s division of 4th Army (5 batts.) 175 3,167 3,342

III. JOINED ON JULY 16

The ‘Army of Reserve of Andalusia’ (Conde de Abispal)
Echevarri’s Division (7 batts.) 237 6,380 6,617
Creagh’s Division (7 batts.) 273 6,181 6,454
C. G. Barcena’s Cavalry Brigade (2 regts.) 39 789 828
Artillery 10 274 284
Total of later arrivals 734 16,791 17,525
 The General Total of the Spanish troops which actually joined
Wellington between May 26 and July 28 was therefore 46,292. This
does not include Mina’s irregulars operating in Aragon and Eastern
Navarre.
 X
THE FRENCH ARMY AT VITTORIA

ARMY OF THE SOUTH. Return of May 29, 1813.

[From Paris Archives, lent me by Mr. Fortescue.]
Officers. Men. Total.
1st Division, Leval:
Brigade Mocquery: 9th Léger, 24th Line 63 2,516 2,579
Brigade Morgan: 88th Line, 96th Line 43 2,056 2,099
Divisional battery and train 3 163 166
Divisional Total 109 4,735 4,844
2nd Division, Cassagne: lent to Army of the Centre.
3rd Division, Villatte:
Brigade Rignoux: 27th Léger, 63rd Line 39 2,539 2,578
Brigade Lefol: 94th Line, 95th Line 50 3,063 3,113
Divisional battery and train 4 179 182
Divisional Total 93 5,781 5,874
4th Division, Conroux:
Brigade Rey: 32nd and 43rd Line 78 3,591 3,669
Brigade Schwitter: 55th and 58th Line 47 2,670 2,717
Divisional battery and train 4 189 193
Divisional Total 129 6,460 6,589
5th Division, brigade Maransin only:
12th Léger, 45th Line 58 2,869 2,927
6th Division, Daricau:
Brigade St. Pol: 21st Léger, 100th Line 53 2,658 2,711
Brigade Remond: 28th Léger, 103rd Line 45 2,939 2,984
Divisional battery and train 3 237 240
 Total 101 5,834 5,935
Total 4½ Infantry Divisions 490 25,679 26,169
Cavalry:
Pierre Soult’s Division:
2nd Hussars, 5th, 10th, 21st Chasseurs 74 1,428 1,502
One battery H.A. and train 4 165 169
Tilly’s Division:
2nd, 4th, 14th, 17th, 26th, 27th Dragoons 88 1,841 1,929
Digeon’s Division:
5th, 12th, 16th, 21st Dragoons 80 1,612 1,692
One battery H.A. and train 3 174 177
Total cavalry 249 6,220 6,469
Artillery Reserve: two batteries and train 5 365 370
Artillery Park: two companies Field Artillery, one
company pontoniers, artificers, train 17 696 713
Engineers: two companies sappers, two miners,
and train 11 619 630
Gendarmerie 4 101 105
Wagon train 2 63 65
Total auxiliary troops 39 1,844 1,883
État-Major of the Army and the divisions 115 — 115
General Total of Army of the South 893 33,743 34,636
ARMY OF THE CENTRE AT VITTORIA
Return of May 29 for Cassagne’s Division; of May 1 only for
the rest, except for the Royal Guards and Spaniards, as
see note.
Officers. Men. Total.
1st Division, Darmagnac:
Brigade Chassé: 28th & 75th Line 35 1,759 1,794
Brigade Neuenstein: 2nd Nassau, 4th Baden,
Frankfort 101 2,577 2,678
Divisional Total 136 4,336 4,472
2nd Division, Cassagne:
Brigade Braun: 16th Léger, 8th Line 95 5,114 5,209
 Brigade Blondeau: 51st Line, 54th Line
Total Infantry 231 9,450 9,681
Cavalry:
Treillard’s Division: 13th, 18th, 19th, 22nd
Dragoons 44 994 1,038
Avy’s Light Cavalry: 27th Chasseurs, Nassau
Chasseurs 22 452 474
Total Cavalry 66 1,446 1,512
Artillery (3 batteries) and train 13 488 501
Engineers (1 company sappers) 2 129 131
Wagon train, &c. 3 195 198
Total Auxiliary Arms 28 812 830
The King’s Spanish Army:[1070]
Royal Guards, General Guy:
Grenadiers, tirailleurs, voltigeurs of the
Guard 80 2,300 2,380
Hussars and Lancers of the Guard 25 400 425
Line:
Regiments of Castile, Toledo, Royal
Étranger 70 2,000 2,070
Cavalry: 1st & 2nd Chasseurs, Hussars of
Guadalajara 70 600 670
Artillery: one battery 3 90 93
Total King’s Army 248 5,390 5,633
Total Army of the Centre 603 17,098 17,691
ARMY OF PORTUGAL
No Return available later than May 1.
Officers. Men. Total.
4th Division, Sarrut:
Brigade Fririon: 2nd Léger, 36th Line
Brigade Menne: 4th Léger, 65th Line 146 4,656 4,802
Divisional field battery and train
6th Division, Lamartinière:
Brigade Gauthier: 118th Line, 119th Line 71 2,496 2,567
Brigade Menne: 120th Line, 122nd Line 102 3,866 3,968
 Divisional field battery and train 3 173 176
Total Infantry Divisions 322 11,191 11,513
Cavalry:
Division Mermet:
Brigade Curto: 13th & 22nd Chasseurs 39 863 902
Brigade ? : 3rd Hussars, 14th & 26th
Chasseurs 42 857 899
Division Boyer:
6th, 11th, 15th, 25th Dragoons 67 1,404 1,471
Total Cavalry 148 3,324 3,472
Reserve Artillery:
One H.A., four field batteries 11 379 390
One company Pontoniers, train, artificers, &c. 10 763 773
Engineers: two companies sappers 5 190 195
Gendarmerie 5 169 174
Wagon train, mule train, &c. 35 898 933
Total auxiliary arms 66 2,389 2,455
General Total of Army of Portugal 536 16,904 17,440
Allowing for wastage May 1 to June 21, there may probably have
been 14,000 of all arms at Vittoria—say 9,500 infantry, 2,800 cavalry,
1,700 auxiliary arms.
Adding the totals of the three armies as above, we should get
2,032 officers and 68,231 men. But deductions of course must be
made:

(1) For decrease from May 1 to June 21 in the Armies of

Portugal and the Centre, and from May 29 to June 21 in the
Army of the South by normal wastage, and in the two former by
drafts sent back to France in May.
(2) For casualties in action since the campaign opened.

The latter would not be large, only Digeon’s Dragoons and

Villatte’s and Sarrut’s infantry divisions having been seriously
engaged during the retreat. The Burgos explosion cost Villatte over
100 men. We need not allow more than 1,500 as an ample estimate
for casualties in action.