Next Article in Journal
Electrical Double Percolation of Polybutadiene/Polyethylene Glycol Blends Loaded with Conducting Polymer Nanofibers
Next Article in Special Issue
Is it Possible to Mechanical Recycle the Materials of the Disposable Filtering Masks?
Previous Article in Journal
Chain Entanglement of 2-Ethylhexyl Hydrogen-2-Ethylhexylphosphonate into Methacrylate-Grafted Nonwoven Fabrics for Applications in Separation and Recovery of Dy (III) and Nd (III) from Aqueous Solution
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Polymers
Volume 12
Issue 11
10.3390/polym12112657
polymers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Analysis and Economic Evaluation of the Use of Recycled Polyamide Powder in Masonry Mortars

by
Miguel A. Salas
1,
Heriberto Pérez-Acebo
2,*,
Verónica Calderón
1 and
Hernán Gonzalo-Orden
3
1
Department of Architectural Construction and Construction and Land Engineering, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, 48013 Bilbao, Spain
3
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Polymers 2020, 12(11), 2657; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12112657
Submission received: 16 October 2020 / Revised: 9 November 2020 / Accepted: 9 November 2020 / Published: 11 November 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymer Waste Recycling and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Due to the considerable amount of waste plastics and polymers that are produced annually, the introduction of these waste products in construction materials is becoming a recurrent solution to recycle them. Among polymers, polyamide represents an important proportion of polymer waste. In this study, sustainable and lightweight mortars were designed and elaborated, substituting the aggregates by polyamide powder waste. Mortars were produced with various dosages of cement/aggregates, and the polyamide substitutions were 25, 50, 75, and 100% of the aggregates. The aim of this paper is to determine the density and the compressive strength of the manufactured mortars to observe the feasibility for being employed as masonry or rendering and plastering mortars. Results showed that with increasing polymer substitution, lower densities were achieved, ranging from 1850 to 790 kg/m3 in modified mortars. Mortars with densities below 1300 kg/m3 are cataloged as lightweight mortars. Furthermore, compressive strength also decreased with more polyamide substitution. Obtained values in recycled mortars were between 15.77 and 2.10 MPa, but the majority of the values (eight out of 12) were over 5 MPa. Additionally, an economic evaluation was performed, and it was observed that the use of waste polyamide implies an important cost reduction, apart from the advantage of not having to manage this waste material. Consequently, not only the mechanical properties of the new recycled materials were verified as well as its economic viability.

1. Introduction

At present, there is an international agreement about the necessity of sustainable development with the aim of a more efficient employment and management of the limited natural resources, which includes the promotion of recycling and reuse of waste materials [1]. For plastics and polymers, which are two of the main industrial byproducts and home waste materials [2], various processes are being conducted to reuse and recycle them, such as mechanical recycling (secondary polymers are obtained through mechanical processes), chemical recycling (monomers are recovered to be employed as new virgin polymers or are transformed in other useful materials), and energy recovery (energy is obtained from the combustion of post-consumer plastics) [3,4,5,6,7]. Additionally, the introduction as fillers in other materials is becoming a possible solution for plastic and polymeric waste materials, especially in construction materials, with examples of reuse in various structural materials, such as concrete [8,9,10,11,12,13], mortars [14,15,16,17,18], bituminous materials for pavements [19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30], and gypsum [31,32,33,34,35,36].
Polyamides are a widely employed thermoplastic polymer. Their main applications are fibers for the textile industry, ropes, toothbrushes, technical parts of vehicles, and gears [5,37], taking advantage of their main properties: thermal stability, chemical resistance, low viscosity before curing, low yield stress, and stress relief. For example, one of the main applications is laser sintering, where polyamides are used as raw material for manufacturing functional parts due to their low density and good mechanical properties. However, after a limited number of times, polyamides cannot be further used, since their properties are not maintained. Of the 61.8 million tons of plastics produced in Europe in 2018, around one million tons was polyamides [38]. Although there are not specific data about the polyamide waste in the laser sintering industry, it can be estimated that the waste amounts to 20% of the total, i.e., representing 200,000 tons of waste per year worldwide [39].
Consequently, there is a need to find a solution for the valuation and employment of this waste product. Efforts are being made to reuse or recycle waste polyamide [40,41,42]. With regard to the use of polyamide powder in construction materials, some previous analyses have been conducted about the characterization of recycled mortars with polyamide powder waste, analyzing their durability and their microstructure [39,43,44]. These previous papers showed that introducing polyamide powder waste is suitable for mortars by analyzing the properties of fresh and hardened mortar like workable life, water retention, water vapor permeability, porosity, adhesion, thermogravimetry, and durability (by determining the frost resistance, the resistance to ageing by thermal shock and to salt crystallization, and by testing the potential expansion of aggregates from hydration reactions). Additionally, the microstructure was analyzed by mercury intrusion porosimetry and by scanning electronic microscopy, and the macrostructure using computerized axial tomography.
Therefore, once that the possible employment of polyamide powder waste in masonry mortars has been preliminary verified for aggregate replacement, it is necessary to go one step further and check if produced new mortars fulfill the requirements of compressive strength that masonry mortars must verify. Thus, the applicability of this sustainable material would be verified and justified for real masonry works.
Hence, the objective of this paper is to know the variation of the density and the compressive strength of the mortars with recycled polyamide with varying dosage of cement and aggregates and increasing percentage of substitution of aggregates by polyamide powder waste. Additionally, an economical evaluation was conducted to verify if the employment of this waste material offers a production cost reduction.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Employed Materials

Employed materials in this research were aggregates, cement, water, and waste polyamide. Aggregates came from a quarry, which can be classified as sand 0/4, i.e., sieved between 0 and 4, and it was characterized according to EN-13139 standard [45]. Table 1 shows the physical characteristics of the aggregates, obtained from laboratory tests.
Employed water came from the municipal water system of the Council of Burgos (Spain), and its analysis is exposed in Table 2.
The cement used in this work was a CEM IV/B (V) 32.5 N, which is a puzzolanic cement type IV, with the addition of siliceous flying ash, low content of clinker, a normal uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of 32.5 MPa, and an ordinary initial mechanical strength. It has a density of 3030 kg/m3, and its chemical composition is 45–64% clinker (K), 36–55% fly ash (V), and 0–5% minority constituents, according to Standard EN 197-1:1994 [49]. It is common cement in masonry works and in roads for soil stabilization and soil cement [50,51]. Table 3 shows the properties of the cement.
The polyamide powder waste is obtained from the waste raw material produced in an industrial process of laser sintering. Its gradation is below 1 mm, and its real density is 1070 kg/m3. The characteristics of the polyamide PA 2200, according to the producer’s file, can be observed in Table 4.

2.2. Preparation of Mortar Samples

Traditional reference mortars, which are usually employed in masonry works, are produced following the proportions that are imposed in projects and works, which are based on experience, without standards to define them.
Reference mortars, i.e., mortars without polyamide, are produced according to the cement/aggregates (C/A) proportions in the volume included in Table 5: 1/3, 1/4, and 1/6.
The ratio between cement and water determines the workability of the mortar and the final characteristics [61]. The ratio water/cement was fixed to achieve an adequate consistency for masonry works, which is said to be the plastic, with a value of 175 ± 10 mm following the EN 1015-3 standard [62].
The aggregates in the mortars were substituted by an increasing percentage of waste polyamide: 25, 50, 75, and 100% of the aggregates were replaced by polyamide powder waste. Therefore, 5 mortar specimens (with commented substitution of aggregates by polyamides and a reference mortar without substitution) were produced for each of the 3 proportions (1/3, 1/4, 1/6), and, hence, 15 different specimens were produced.
As established in the standard EN 1015-2 [63], the fresh mortar employed in the tests must have the adequate consistency for its use in real works. For masonry works, the mortars that assure an adequate consistency have plastic consistency, denominated as “P”, as defined in Table 6.
The mortar was prepared from dry raw materials, Figure S1a, and water. A mechanic mixing of 5 l of capacity was employed for mixing the mortar, shown in Figure S1b. It was prepared following the procedure established in the standard EN-196-1 [64].

2.3. Tests

The densities of the manufactured mortars were calculated and the compressive strength of the specimens was tested.
The density was calculated with the hardened material following the standard EN 1015-10 [65]. The compaction equipment is shown in Figure S2a, and the mold being filled and compacted can be observed in Figure S2b.
All the samples have followed the same procedure. The molds with the fresh mortar were introduced in a curing room, with a constant temperature of 20 °C ± 2 °C and a relative humidity of 95% (Figure S3). After 24 h, they were taken from the molds, and after being conveniently referred, they were introduced again in the curing room to continue the curing process in the same conditions. Specimens have the following dimensions: 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm. Twenty-eight days after they were produced, samples were tested.
The compressive strength of the specimens was calculated following the standard EN 998-1 [66] and the standard EN 998-2:2016 [67]. The equipment used for the compressive tests was a universal test machine of the firm Suzpecar, model MEM-101/SDC, shown in Figure S4a. The test was carried out in each of the two parts obtained after a flexural test. The specimen is placed between two plates of 40 mm × 40 mm, shown in Figure S4b. The machine applies a load at a constant speed until the sample is broken.

3. Results and Discussion

Table 7 shows all the dosages of the mortars that were manufactured.
It was observed that the quantity of water is higher as the quantity of substituted aggregates increases due to the diameter of the particle of polyamide powder, which is smaller than the aggregates that are substituted. Hence, there is a higher specific surface, which requires a higher quantity of water as the amount of polyamide increases.

3.1. Density of the Mortars

The density of the mortars is mainly dependent on the density, gradation, and volume of their components. Moreover, the proportion of water/cement also has an impact on the density, becoming more porous as the proportion increases. The values of density after 28 days are shown in Table 8.
It can be observed that the density of the hardened materials is inversely proportional to the added quantity of polyamide. With a higher percentage of polymer, the requirement of water is higher, which increases the porosity due to the evaporation of water, which justifies the decrease in the density. When the aggregates are totally substituted, the densities decrease 46, 53, and 61% in series I, II and III, respectively.
Additionally, the scatter plot of the density vs. the percentage of substituted aggregate was created for each series to analyze the curves that best correlate both variables for each series (Figure 1). A linear relationship was established for all the series, with determination coefficients over 0.99, implying that more than 99% of the variability of the variable can be explained by the models [68,69,70,71]. Moreover, the coefficients of the independent variable (the percentage of substituted aggregates) showed that for each 10% of aggregate replacement, the density decreases between 96.8 to 123.6 kg/m3, depending on the mortar series.
From all the tested specimens, there are five with a density below 1300 kg/m3. These mortars can be considered as “Light rendering and plastering mortar” according to standard EN 998-1:2016 [66] and “light masonry mortar” according to standard EN 998-2:2016 [67], which could be employed in applications where loads must be reduced.

3.2. Compressive Strength

The compressive strength is one of the main parameters to select the type of mortar in works. The compressive strength gives an idea of the internal cohesion of the mortar, indicating its ability to support loads without disaggregation. It is a measure of the mechanical quality of the mortar, and it can be related to other properties such as the adherence or the durability.
The standard EN 998-2:2016 [67] classifies the masonry mortar as a function of its compressive strength at 28 days, as shown in Table 9.
The standard EN 998-1 [65] classifies the rendering and plastering mortars as a function of its compressive strength at 28 days, as shown in Table 10.
For each mortar denomination, six samples were tested. The final value was obtained as the arithmetical mean of the individual values, shown in Table 11. The values of the six specimens that were tested for each denomination are shown in Table S1 in Supplementary Materials. As seen, the variability within the same denomination is low.
The progressive decrease in the compressive strength as the polymer quantity increases is due to the lower density of the polyamide and the increase in water in the mixes with higher proportions of polymer, which leads to a higher porosity in the hardened material and, hence, also to lower strengths. A total replacement of aggregates decreases the compressive strength up to between 61 and 67%, depending on the series.
In Figure 2, it can be observed the compressive strength at 28 days of the mortars with the employed quantity of cement in each denomination.
As seen, although the progressive decrease in the density means an increase in porosity, which results in a reduction in the compressive strength, most of the mortars have a compressive strength over 5 MPa, which is enough for most of the applications of mortars. In Figure 2, three lines were introduced, with the values of 5 and 10 MPa for masonry mortars (M5 and M10) and with the value of 6 MPa for rendering and plastering mortars (Class CS-IV). As indicated in Table 9, the minimum strength for masonry mortars is 1 MPa, a value that is reached by all the tested specimens.
Additionally, the correlation between the compressive strength and the percentage of substituted aggregate was analyzed. The scatter plot of the compressive strength vs. percentage of substituted aggregates showed again that the relationships were linear for the three series, with determination coefficients over 0.95 (Figure 3). Moreover, with a replacement of 10% of aggregates, the compressive strength decrease 1.1 MPa and 0.9 MPa in series I and II, respectively, while in series III, 0.04 MPa.

4. Economic Viability

The following factors were considered for the economic viability of mortars with recycled polyamide waste:
  • The cost of the raw material until the moment that consumers can buy it.
  • The cost of mixing the materials. These costs include the transport to the construction site.
  • The cost of placing the material in the construction site.
Therefore, the cost that is similar in traditional mortars and in recycled mortars is not considered, because it does not give additional information about the viability of the proposed models.

4.1. Quantitative Viability

The costs of each of the raw materials were obtained as follows:
  • The prices of the cement and the aggregates (sand) were asked to various construction material suppliers.
  • The price of the water was obtained from the Water Service of the Council of Burgos.
  • The price of the polyamide is considered as zero, and it is supposed that it is powder, hence, there is no need for further treatment.
In Table 12, the prices of each of the raw materials are shown, in EUR per kg.
Considering the proportions and required quantities for each of the mortars that were tested, the cost of a m3 is determined for each component and for the mortar (Table 13).
Therefore, it can be seen that with a higher proportion of polymer in the mortar, the cost of the final product is reduced due to the simple substitution of the aggregates (with a determined cost) by waste polyamide, which, ideally, is obtained at zero cost, because it does not need any treatment before the addition to the mixture. However, the cost of the transport of the waste polyamide from the place where it is generated to the mortar production plant must be considered as a key factor. This cost must be included in recycled mortars. Obviously, higher distances imply higher costs.
After asking various transport companies, the average cost of the transport of the polyamide would be EUR 0.04 per ton and kilometer. Similarly, using data from various transport companies, another transport cost can be calculated:
  • Truck used for the transport: truck with a load capacity of 25 t, with a cost of 40 EUR/h, which includes the vehicle costs (assurance, maintenance costs, etc.), petrol costs, and driver.
  • A time of 4 h is estimated for 100 km of outgoing and 100 km of return travel, including uploading and downloading.
For calculating the transport cost, Equation (1) was employed:
Load 2 Distance Price = Travel time Hour cost
where Load is the load that the truck can transport (t), Distance is the distance of one way of transport (km), Price is the price that cost the transport (EUR/t), Travel time is the estimated time for outgoing and return travel (h), and Hour Cost is the cost per hour of the truck (EUR/h).
Substituting the values in Equation (1),
25 t 2 100 km Price = 4 h 40 EUR/h
Price (cost) of 0.032 EUR/t/km is obtained, lower than the firstly indicated average price. Taking the higher one, i.e., 0.04 EUR/t/km, the cost of mortars produced in the place of the waste polymer (last column of Table 13) and taking into account the transport of that waste polymer to various distances (Table 14).
As seen, the proposed mortars with waste polyamide have a similar cost, even if long distances are considered. The cost reduction in recycled mortars is similar to the cost of production of those recycled mortars in place of the waste materials, i.e., the transport cost increases slightly the total cost, being almost independent of the distance.

4.2. Qualitative Viability

As it can be deduced from the results of the quantitative evaluation, the proposed mortars with waste polyamide are economically feasible by themselves. Nevertheless, the research was completed with other variables, which, although they cannot be measured in net values, have an impact on the added values of these products and must be taken into account.
Initially, it was considered that the waste materials were sent to landfills at zero cost, but, in reality, the treatment of these by-products have a transport and management cost. Hence, this profit must be included to the previous calculations.
Various waste management companies were consulted and the average cost of managing this polymer would be around 60 EUR/t of polyamide. If it is applied to each of the proposed percentages, an additional profit is obtained that must be deducted from the final cost (Table 15).
When the 100% of the aggregates are replaced by polyamide, the mortar becomes very economic, reaching the case that the M-6PA100 mortar has a final cost of practically null.

4.3. Mortar Selection

When the cost reduction factors are considered, instead of the mechanical properties of the mixes, it can be deduced that some proportions provide enough compressive strength for being employed as masonry or rendering and plastering mortars, a lower density that contributes to lighten the final load of the building structure, and lower final cost. Table 16 summarizes all the relevant data of the tested mortar specimens: properties of the material and prices of the mortars, according to the distance between where the polyamide powder waste is generated and the mortar production plant and considering the cost of the waste material management (60 EUR/t of polyamide).
The values of Table 16 do not show a unique better solution for mortar selection. It is clear that higher percentages of aggregate substitution lead to lower prices, and mortars with 75 or 100% of replacement would be preferred. However, those mortars would not be useful for some applications. Furthermore, the obtained prices are approximate and can vary from one country to another depending on the cost of the transport and the cost of the waste management. Moreover, masonry mortars are employed in various applications and the requested strength values can vary. Therefore, it is not adequate to identify a unique mortar as the most appropriate one. However, it is worth mentioning the mortar M-3PA75, which is very interesting, because it has a cost of 38.64 EUR/m3 (it has a cost reduction in more than 56% when compared to the reference mortar M-3R). It practically reaches a compressive strength of 10 MPa, which is enough for required applications of this type of materials, and a density of 1350 kg/m3.

5. Conclusions

Apart from the implicit environmental profit that represents the employment of large amounts of waste polymers and the reduction in the employment of non-removable natural resources, this research develops the production of lightweight mortars with waste powder polyamide with additional advantages.
Firstly, the aggregates of the mortars can be substituted partially or completely by polyamide powder waste, producing workable materials as far as the quantity of water that provides an adequate consistency (plastic) is added. Moreover, the density of the specimens decreases considerably as the introduced quantity of waste materials increases, reaching densities of 800 kg/m3 in a hardened state, lower than 1300 kg/m3, which is considered the maximum value for a lightweight mortar.
Although the compressive strength decreases as more quantity of polymer is introduced, there are some dosages that fulfill the standards in law regarding the mechanical properties when they are employed as masonry or rendering and plastering mortars.
From the economic study the following conclusions can be extracted:
  • The final price of the mortar depends on the quantity of each element separately, being the percentage of cement the determinant factor.
  • Higher quantities of polyamide imply higher price reduction.
  • If the distance from the location of the waste polymer to the point of production is up to 200 km, the price of the mortar is increased by EUR 8, but the saving of the waste management can be up to EUR 66.
In case of recommending a masonry mortar with enough mechanical properties and a competitive price, the mortar M-3PA75 would be selected because its compressive strength is near 10 MPa, and the price reduction, when compared with the reference mortar, is about 35%.
Finally, after verifying the feasibility of the employment of these recycled mortars, in a next step of the research, performance in real works can be checked.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/12/11/2657/s1, Figure S1: (a) Dry raw materials, (b) Mortar mixing device, Figure S2: (a) Compaction device, (b) Mould filled with mortar, with 3 specimens, Figure S3: Curing room with various specimens, Figure S4: (a) Model MEM-101/SDC of the firm Suxpecar, (b) Testing a specimen, Table S1: Compressive strength values of the six specimens tested for each mortar denomination.

Author Contributions

M.A.S., H.P.-A., V.C. and H.G.-O. contributed to this work similarly. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pérez, I.; Toledano, M.; Gallego, J.; Taibo, J. Mechanical properties of hot mix asphalt made with recycled aggregates from reclaimed construction and demolition debris. Mater. Constr. 2007, 57, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Aumnate, C.; Rudolph, N.; Sarmadi, M. Recycling of polypropylene/polyethylene blends: Effects of chain structure on the crystallization behaviors. Polymers 2019, 11, 1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Galve, J.E.; Elduque, D.; Pina, C.; Clavería, I.; Acero, R.; Fernández, A.; Javierre, C. Dimensional stability and process capability of an industrial component injected with recycled polypropylene. Polymers 2019, 11, 1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Buss, A.H.; Koveleski, J.L.; Pagani, R.N.; Da Silva, V.L.; Silva, J.M. Proposal to reuse rubber waste from end-of-life tires using thermosetting resin. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Da Silva, D.J.; Wiebeck, H. Current options for characterizing, sorting, and recycling polymeric waste. Prog. Rubber Plast. Recycl. Technol. 2020, 36, 284–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kiss, G.; Rusu, G.; Peter, F.; Tanase, I.; Bandur, G. Recovery of flexible polyurethane foam waste from efficient reuse in industrial formulations. Polymers 2020, 12, 1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ungureanu, O.I.; Bulgariu, D.; Mocanu, A.M.; Bulgariu, L. Functionalized PET waste based low-cost adsorbents for adsorptive removal of Cu(II) ions from aqueous media. Water 2020, 12, 2624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Courard, L. Evaluation of thermodynamic properties of concrete substrates and cement slurries modified with admixtures. Mater. Struct. 2002, 35, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Siddique, R.; Khatib, J.; Kaur, I. Use of recycled plastic in concrete: A review. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 1835–1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Saikia, N.; de Brito, J. Mechanical properties and abrasion behaviour of concrete containing shredded PET bottle waste as a partial substitution of natural aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 52, 236–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zegardło, B.; Szelag, M.; Ogrodnik, P.; Bombik, A. Physico-mechanical properties and microstructure of polymer concrete with recycled glass aggregate. Materials 2018, 11, 1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Sabau, E.; Udroiu, R.; Bere, P.; Buransky, I.; Miron-Borzan, C.S. A novel polymer concrete composite with GFRP waste: Applications, morphology and porosity characterization. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Li, X.M.; Ling, T.C.; Mo, K.H. Functions and impacts of plastic/rubber wastes as eco-friendly aggregate in concrete—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 240, 117869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Junco, C.; Gadea, J.; Rondríguez, A.; Gutiérrez-González, S.; Calderón, V. Durability of lightweight masonry mortars made with recycled polyurethane foam. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 1174–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rubio-de Hita, P.; Pérez-Gálvez, F.; Morales-Conde, M.J.; Pedreño-Rojas, M.A. Reuse of plastic waste of mixed polypropylene as aggregate in mortars for the manufacture of pieces for restoring jack arch floors with timber beams. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 1515–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Farinha, C.B.; De Brito, J.; Veiga, R. Assessment of glass fiber reinforced polymer waste reuse as filler in mortars. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 210, 1579–1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Makri, C.; Hahladakis, J.N.; Gidarakos, E. Use and assessment of “e-plastics” as recycled aggregates in cement mortar. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 379, 120776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Rodin, H.; Nassiri, S.; Englund, K.; Fakron, O.; Li, H. Recycled glass fiber reinforced polymer composites incorporated in mortar for improved mechanical performance. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 187, 738–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Hassani, A.; Ganjidoust, H.; Maghanaki, A.A. Use of plastic waste (poly-ethylene terephthalate) in aspaht concrete mixture as aggregate replacement. Waste Manag. Res. 2005, 23, 322–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rahman, M.T.; Hainin, M.R.; Bakar, W.A.W. Use of waste cooking oil, tire rubber powder and palm oil fuel ash in partial replacement of bitumen. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 150, 95–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Salas, M.A.; Pérez-Acebo, H.; Calderón, V.; Gonzalo-Orden, H. Bitumen modified with recycled polyurethane foam for employment in hot mix asphalt. Ing. Investig. 2018, 38, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vila-Cortavitarte, M.; Lastra-González, P.; Calzada-Pérez, M.A.; Indacoechea-Vega, I. Analysis of the influence of using recycled polystyrene as a substitute for bitumen in the behaviour of asphalt concrete mixtures. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 170, 1279–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hu, C.C.; Lin, W.J.; Partl, M.; Wang, D.Y.; Yu, H.Y.; Zhang, Z. Waste packaging tape as a novel bitumen modifier for hot-mix asphalt. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 193, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Leng, Z.; Padhan, R.K.; Sreeram, A. Production of a sustainable paving material through chemical recycling of waste PET into crumb rubber modified asphalt. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 180, 682–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Azarhoosh, A.R.; Hamedi, G.H.; Abandansari, H.F. Providing Laboratory Rutting Models for Modified Asphalt Mixes with Different Waste Materials. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng. 2018, 62, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Salas, M.A.; Pérez-Acebo, H. Introduction of recycled polyurethane foam in mastic asphalt. Gradevinar 2018, 70, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ling, T.; Lu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Li, C.; Oeser, M. Value-added applications of waste rubber and waste plastic in asphalt binders as a multifunctional additive. Materials 2019, 12, 1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Rahman, M.T.; Mohajerani, A.; Giustozzi, F. Recycling of waste materials for asphalt concrete and bitumen: A review. Materials 2020, 13, 1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Vargas, C.; El Hanandeh, A. Systematic literature review, meta-analysis and artificial neural network modelling of plastic waste addition to bitumen. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wu, S.; Montalvo, L. Repurposing waste plastics into cleaners asphalt pavement materials: A critical literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. González Madariaga, F.J.; Macia, J.L. EPS (expanded polystyrene) recycled bends mixed with plaster or stucco, some applications in building industry. Inf. Constr. 2008, 60, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gutiérrez-González, S.; Gadea, J.; Rodríguez, A.; Junco, C.; Calderón, V. Lightweight plaster materials with enhanced thermal properties made with polyurethane foam wastes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 28, 653–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. San-Antonio-González, A.; Del Río Merino, M.; Viñas Arrebola, C.; Villoria-Sáez, P. Lightweight material made with gypsum and extruded polystyrene waste with enhanced thermal behaviour. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 93, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Alameda, L.; Calderón, V.; Junco, C.; Rodríguez, A.; Gadea, J.; Gutiérrez-González, S. Characterization of gypsum plasterboard with polyurethane foam waste reinforced with polypropylene fibers. Mater. Constr. 2016, 66, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Vidales Barriguete, A.; del Río Merino, M.; Atanes Sánchez, E.; Piña Ramírez, C.; Viñas Arrebola, C. Analysis of the feasibility of the use of CDW as a low-environmental-impact aggregate in conglomerates. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 178, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Pedreño-Rojas, M.A.; Rodriguez-Liñán, C.; Flores-Colen, I.; de Brito, J. Use of polycarbonate waste as aggregate in recycled gypsum plasters. Materials 2020, 13, 3042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Singh, N.; Hui, D.; Singh, R.; Ahuja, I.P.S.; Feo, L.; Fraternali, F. Recycling of plastic solid waste: A state of art review and future applications. Compos. Part B Eng. 2017, 115, 409–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. PlasticEurope. Plastics—The Facts 2019. An Analysis of European Plastics Production, Demand and Waste Data; European Association of Plastics Manufacturers (PlasticEurope): Brussels, Belgium, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  39. Salas, M.A.; Gadea, J.; Gutiérrez-González, S.; Horgnies, M.; Calderón, V. Recycled polyamide mortars modified with non-ionic surfactant: Physical and mechanical strength after durability tests. Mater. Struct. 2015, 49, 3385–3395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hassan, M.M.; Badway, N.A.; Gamal, A.M.; Elnaggar, M.Y.; Hegazy, E.S.A. Studies on mechanical, thermal and morphological properties of irradiated recycled polyamide and waste rubber powder blends. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B-Beam Interact. Mater. At. 2010, 268, 1427–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hassan, M.M.; Badway, N.A.; Gamal, A.M.; Elnaggar, M.Y.; Hegazy, E.S.A. Reinforcement of irradiated waste polyamide/reclaimed rubber powder composites with glass fiber. Polym. Compos. 2016, 37, 1539–1548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Makomaski, G. Preparation of porous carbon materials from waste-polyamide-containing pitch-polymer compositions. Prezemysl. Chem. 2020, 99, 132–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Gadea, J.; Salas, M.A.; Gutiérrez-González, S.; Rodríguez, A.; Horgnies, M.; Calderón, V. Permeability and porosity on lightweight mortars fabricated with polyamide powder wastes. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 687, 527–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Horgnies, M.; Gutiérrez-González, S.; Rodríguez, A.; Calderón, V. Effects of the use of polyamide powder wastes on the microstructure and macroscopic properties of masonry mortars. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2014, 52, 64–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 13139:2002/AC:2004. Aggregates for Mortar; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  46. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 933-1:2012. Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates—Part 1: Determination of Particle Size Distribution—Sieving Method; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  47. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 1097-3: 1998. Tests for Mechanical and Physical Properties of Aggregates—Part 3: Determination of Loose Bulk Density and Voids; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  48. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 1097-6:2013. Tests for Mechanical and Physical Properties of Aggregates—Part 6: Determination of Particle Density and Water Absorption; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  49. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 197-1:1994. Cement Composition, Specification and Conformity Criteria. Part 1: Common Cements; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  50. IECA-CEDEX. Manual de Firmes con Capas Tratadas con Cemento, 2nd ed.; Centro de Estudios y Experimentación de Obras Públicas (CEDEX): Madrid, Spain, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  51. Linares-Unamunzaga, A.; Pérez-Acebo, H.; Rojo, M.; Gonzalo-Orden, H. Flexural strength prediction models for soil-cement from Unconfined Compressive Strength at seven days. Materials 2019, 12, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. DIN (Deutsches Institut fur Norming). DIN 53466. Testing of Plastics; Determination of Bulk Factor and Apparent Density of Moulding Materials; Deutsches Institut fur Norming E.V.: Berlin, Germany, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  53. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). ISO 527-1:2012. Plastics—Determination of Tensile Properties—Part 1: General Principles; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  54. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). ISO 178:2011/A1:2013. Plastics—Determination of Flexural Properties; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  55. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN ISO 179-1:2010. Plastics—Determination of Charpy Impact Properties—Part 1: Non-Instrumented Impact Test (ISO 179-1:2010); European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  56. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN ISO 180 Plastics—Determination of Izod Impact Strength. (ISO 180:2000); European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  57. ISO (International Organization for Standardization. ISO 2039-1:2001 Plastics—Determination of Hardness—Part 1: Ball Indentation Method (ISO 2039-1:2001); International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  58. DIN (Deutsches Institut fur Norming). DIN 53505. Shore A and Shore D Hardness Testing of Rubber; Deutsches Institut fur Norming E.V.: Berlin, Germany, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  59. DIN (Deutsches Institut fur Norming). DIN 53736, Testing of Plastics; Determination of the Melt Temperature of Semicristaline Plastics; Deutsches Institut fur Norming E.V.: Berlin, Germany, 1973. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  60. ISO (International Organization for Standardization. ISO 306:2013 Plastics—Thermoplastic Material—Determination of Vicat Softening Temperature (VST); International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  61. Mounaga, P.; Gbongbon, W.; Poullain, P.; Tucry, P. Proportioning and characterization of lightweight concrete mixtures with rigid polyurethane foam wastes. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008, 30, 806–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 1015-3:2000. Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry. Part 3: Determination of Consistence of Fresh Mortar (by Flow Table); European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  63. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 1015-2:1999/A1:2007. Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry—Part 2: Bulk Sampling of Mortars and Preparation of Test Mortars; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  64. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 196-1:2016. Methods of Testing Cement—Part 1: Determination of Strength; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  65. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 1015-10:2000/A1:2007. Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry—Part 10: Determination of Bulk Density of Hardened Mortar; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  66. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 998-1: 2016 Specification for Mortar for Masonry—Part 1: Rendering and Plastering Mortar; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  67. ECN (European Committee for Standardization). EN 998-2: 2016. Specification for Mortar for Masonry—Part 2: Masonry Mortar; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  68. Pérez-Acebo, H.; Gonzalo-Orden, H.; Findley, D.J.; Rojí, E. A skid resistance prediction model for an entire road network. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 262, 120041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Pérez-Acebo, H.; Ziolkowski, R.; Linares-Unamunzaga, A.; Gonzalo-Orden, H. A series of vertical deflections, a promising traffic calming measure: Analysis and recommendations for spacing. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Fernández-Gutiérrez, J.D.; Pérez-Acebo, H.; Mulone-Andere, D. Correlation between Bieniawski’s RMR index and Barton’s Q index in fine-grained sedimentary rock formations. Inf. Constr. 2017, 69, e205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Gallo, J.; Pérez-Acebo, H. Performance model for Micro Tunnelling Boring Machines (MTBM). Inf. Constr. 2017, 69, e203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Polymers 12 02657 g001 550
Figure 1. Density vs. percentage of substituted aggregate.
Figure 1. Density vs. percentage of substituted aggregate.
Polymers 12 02657 g001
Polymers 12 02657 g002 550
Figure 2. Comparison between the compressive strength values (MPa) and kg cement/m3 of mortars.
Figure 2. Comparison between the compressive strength values (MPa) and kg cement/m3 of mortars.
Polymers 12 02657 g002
Polymers 12 02657 g003 550
Figure 3. Density vs. percentage of substituted aggregate.
Figure 3. Density vs. percentage of substituted aggregate.
Polymers 12 02657 g003
Table
Table 1. Physical characteristics of the aggregates.
Table 1. Physical characteristics of the aggregates.
TestStandardResult
Fine contentEN-933-1 [46]0.17%
Particle sizeEN-13139 [45]0/4
Quality of fineEN-13139 [45]Contrasted
Aggregate shapeEN-13139 [45]Not relevant
Bulk densityEN-1097-3 [47]1380 kg/m3
Real density of the aggregateEN-1097-6 [48]2600 kg/m3
PorosityEN-1097-3 [47]46.92%
Table
Table 2. Physical and chemical parameters of the water.
Table 2. Physical and chemical parameters of the water.
Physical and Chemical ParametersUnitsValuesPhysic and Chemical ParametersUnitsValues
SmellDilution index0.0Sodiummg/l2.2
TasteDilution index0.0Chloridesmg/l3.9
Colormg/l Pt/Co<1.0Sulfatesmg/l5.5
pHpH units8.0Calciummg/l18.0
TurbidityUNF0.Total hardness°fH5.0
ConductivityμS/cm111.8Bicarbonatemg/l57.6
Nitratesmg/l0.7Ironmg/l0.02
Nitritesmg/l<0.05Aluminummg/l0.03
Ammoniummg/l<0.01Coppermg/l<0.005
Residual free chlorinemg/l0.5Sum of trihalomethanesmg/l<0.02
Table
Table 3. Cement properties.
Table 3. Cement properties.
Main Standardized ComponentValueCement Standardized SpecificationsValue
Clinker (K)45–64%Sulfate≤3.5%
Silica fumes (D) 1-Initial setting time≥75 min
Natural pozzolana (P) 1-Final setting time≤720 min
Calcined natural pozzolans (Q)1-Expansion≤10 mm
Siliceous fly ash (V) 136–55%UCS at 7 days≥16 MPa
Calcareous fly ash (W) 1-UCS at 28 days32.5 ≤ R ≤ 52.5 MPa
Minority components0–5%Puzzolanicity8 to 15 days
Chlorides≤0.10%--
1 The sum of (D), (P), (Q), (V), and (W) for cements CEM IV must be 36–55%.
Table
Table 4. Characteristics of the PA 2200 polyamide according to the supplier’s technical file.
Table 4. Characteristics of the PA 2200 polyamide according to the supplier’s technical file.
CharacteristicsStandardValueUnits
Average granulometryLaser curvature60μm
Bulk densityDIN 53466 [52]0.435–0.445g/cm3
Laser sintered density EOS method0.9–0.95g/cm3
E tensile modulusEN ISO 527 [53]1700 ± 150MPa
Tensile strengthEN ISO 527 [53]45 ± 3MPa
Elongation at fractureEN ISO 527 [53]20 ± 5%
E flexural modulusES ISO 178 [54]1240 ± 130MPa
Charpy impact test strengthEN ISO 179 [55]53 ± 3.8kJ/m2
Charpy resilienceEN ISO 179 [55]4.8 ± 0.3kJ/m2
Izod impact test strengthEN ISO 180 [56]32.8 ± 3.4kJ/m2
Izod resilienceEN ISO 180 [56]4.4 ± 0.4kJ/m2
Ball indentation hardnessEN ISO 2039 [57]77.6 ± 2
D shore hardnessDIN 53505 [58]75 ± 2
Burning pointDIN 53736 [59]172–180°C
Softening temperatureEN ISO 306 [60]163°C
Table
Table 5. Volume and weight dosages of cement and aggregate in mortars.
Table 5. Volume and weight dosages of cement and aggregate in mortars.
C/A Proportion in VolumeCement (kg)Aggregate (kg)C/A Proportion in Weight
1/34401.3461/3.05
1/43501.4221/4.06
1/62501.5191/6.07
Table
Table 6. Consistency types and denomination according to EN 1015-3.
Table 6. Consistency types and denomination according to EN 1015-3.
ConsistencyDenominationSlump Flow Value (mm)
Dry <140
PlasticP140–200
FluidF>200
Table
Table 7. Dosages in weight of the raw materials for each mortar.
Table 7. Dosages in weight of the raw materials for each mortar.
SeriesDenominationAggregates Substituted by Polyamide in Volume (%)Cement (g)Aggregate (g)Polyamide (g)Water (g)W/C
Series IM-3R060018000.0420.00.70
Series IM-3PA25256001350185.2480.00.80
Series IM-3PA5050600900370.4460.00.77
Series IM-3PA7575600450555.6523.00.87
Series IM-3PA1001006000740.8487.00.81
Series IIM-4R060024000.0433.70.89
Series IIM-4PA25256001800246.9533.30.89
Series IIM-4PA50506001200493.9546.60.91
Series IIM-4PA7575600600740.8650.01.08
Series IIM-4PA1001006000987.7800.01.33
Series IIIM-6R060036000.0773.01.29
Series IIIM-6PA25256002700370.4724.01.21
Series IIIM-6PA50506001800740.8809.81.35
Series IIIM-6PA75756009001111.2952.21.59
Series IIIM-6PA10010060001481.21110.01.85
Table
Table 8. Density values of the tested specimens.
Table 8. Density values of the tested specimens.
SeriesDenominationDensity (kg/m3)
Series IM-3R2080
Series IM-3PA251850
Series IM-3PA501610
Series IM-3PA751350
Series IM-3PA1001120
Series IIM-4R2050
Series IIM-4PA251850
Series IIM-4PA501540
Series IIM-4PA751270
Series IIM-4PA100950
Series IIIM-6R2020
Series IIIM-6PA251710
Series IIIM-6PA501500
Series IIIM-6PA751080
Series IIIM-6PA100790
Table
Table 9. Masonry mortar classes according to the compressive strength.
Table 9. Masonry mortar classes according to the compressive strength.
ClassM1M2M5M10M15M20Md
Compressive strength (MPa)12.55101520d
d: a compressive strength over 25 MPa, declared by the producer.
Table
Table 10. Rendering and plastering mortar classes according to the compressive strength.
Table 10. Rendering and plastering mortar classes according to the compressive strength.
Class CS I CS II CS III CS IV
Compressive strength at 28 days (MPa)0.4–2.51.5–5.03.5–7.5≥6.0
Table
Table 11. Average compressive strength of each mortar denomination.
Table 11. Average compressive strength of each mortar denomination.
SeriesDenominationCompressive Strength (MPa)Standard Deviation
Series IM-3R18.300.664
Series IM-3PA2515.770.294
Series IM-3PA5014.270.084
Series IM-3PA759.540.077
Series IM-3PA1007.100.178
Series IIM-4R12.220.165
Series IIM-4PA2511.590.382
Series IIM-4PA508.940.267
Series IIM-4PA755.280.149
Series IIM-4PA1004.130.059
Series IIIM-6R6.320.080
Series IIIM-6PA255.540.394
Series IIIM-6PA503.500.702
Series IIIM-6PA752.950.116
Series IIIM-6PA1002.100.091
Table
Table 12. Cost of the raw materials.
Table 12. Cost of the raw materials.
Raw MaterialCost (EUR/kg)
Cement IV0.12857
Aggregates (Sand)0.02285
Polyamide0.00000
Water0.00042
Table
Table 13. Cost for each of the mortar denominations with a zero value for polyamide powder waste.
Table 13. Cost for each of the mortar denominations with a zero value for polyamide powder waste.
Cost (EUR/m3 of Mortar)
DenominationCementAggregatesPolyamideWaterTotal
M-3R57.2230.770.000.1388.63
M-3PA2555.4622.180.000.1477.78
M-3PA5054.6214.560.000.1469.32
M-3PA7550.746.760.000.1457.65
M-3PA10050.220.000.000.1550.38
M-4R45.8432.590.000.1378.57
M-4PA2544.8723.930.000.1368.93
M-4PA5044.8115.930.000.1360.87
M-4PA7541.697.410.000.1549.24
M-4PA10035.540.000.000.1535.69
M-6R31.9634.080.000.1366.16
M-6PA2532.3025.830.000.1357.56
M-6PA5030.4616.240.000.1346.84
M-6PA7527.287.270.000.1434.69
M-6PA10024.650.000.000.1524.80
Table
Table 14. Cost for each of the mortar denominations considering various distance for transporting the polyamide powder waste to the mortar production plant.
Table 14. Cost for each of the mortar denominations considering various distance for transporting the polyamide powder waste to the mortar production plant.
DenominationCost (EUR/m3 of Mortar)
in Place of the Waste Materialto 20 kmto 50 kmto 100 kmto 200 km
M-3R88.6388.6388.6388.6388.63
M-3PA2577.7877.8878.0478.3178.84
M-3PA5069.3269.5369.8470.3771.42
M-3PA7557.6557.9458.3859.1160.57
M-3PA10050.3850.8151.4752.5654.75
M-4R78.5778.5778.5778.5778.57
M-4PA2568.9369.0569.2269.5170.08
M-4PA5060.8761.1061.4562.0263.17
M-4PA7549.2449.5650.0450.8452.44
M-4PA10035.6936.0336.6037.5139.33
M-6R66.1666.1666.1666.1666.16
M-6PA2557.5657.6857.8758.1858.80
M-6PA5046.8457.0757.4248.0149.18
M-6PA7534.6935.0035.4836.2637.83
M-6PA10024.8025.1825.7526.7028.59
Table
Table 15. Cost for each mortar denominations considering the saving on the waste management.
Table 15. Cost for each mortar denominations considering the saving on the waste management.
DenominationCost (EUR/m3 of Mortar) at 200 kmAdditional Profit (Considering 60 EUR/t PA)Final Cost (EUR/m3 of Mortar)
M-3R88.630.0088.63
M-3PA2578.847.9970.85
M-3PA5071.4215.7355.68
M-3PA7560.5721.9338.64
M-3PA10054.7532.8321.92
M-4R78.570.0078.57
M-4PA2570.088.6261.46
M-4PA5063.1717.2145.96
M-4PA7552.4424.0228.43
M-4PA10039.3327.3012.03
M-6R66.160.0066.16
M-6PA2558.809.3149.49
M-6PA5049.1817.5531.63
M-6PA7537.8323.5114.26
M-6PA10028.5928.410.18
Table
Table 16. Summary of the properties (density and compressive strength) and prices of the tested mortar specimens.
Table 16. Summary of the properties (density and compressive strength) and prices of the tested mortar specimens.
DenominationDensity (kg/m3)Compressive Strength (MPa)Cost (EUR/m3 of Mortar) at 0 km aCost (EUR/m3 of Mortar) at 200 km bFinal Cost (EUR/m3 of Mortar) at 200 km Including Profit
M-3R208018.388.6388.6388.63
M-3PA25185015.7777.7878.8470.85
M-3PA50161014.2769.3271.4255.68
M-3PA7513509.5457.6560.5738.64
M-3PA10011207.1050.3854.7521.92
M-4R205012.2278.5778.5778.57
M-4PA25185011.5968.9370.0861.46
M-4PA5015408.9460.8763.1745.96
M-4PA7512705.2849.2452.4428.43
M-4PA1009504.1335.6939.3312.03
M-6R20206.3266.1666.1666.16
M-6PA2517105.5457.5658.8049.49
M-6PA5015003.5046.8449.1831.63
M-6PA7510802.9534.6937.8314.26
M-6PA1007902.1024.8028.590.18
Notes: a: Considering that the polyamide powder waste is generated at 0 km from the mortar production plant; b: Considering that the polyamide powder waste is generated at 200 km from the mortar production plant; c: Considering that the polyamide powder waste is generated at 200 km from the mortar production plant and considering the profit of managing the waste material (60 EUR/t of polyamide).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Salas, M.A.; Pérez-Acebo, H.; Calderón, V.; Gonzalo-Orden, H. Analysis and Economic Evaluation of the Use of Recycled Polyamide Powder in Masonry Mortars. Polymers 2020, 12, 2657. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12112657

AMA Style

Salas MA, Pérez-Acebo H, Calderón V, Gonzalo-Orden H. Analysis and Economic Evaluation of the Use of Recycled Polyamide Powder in Masonry Mortars. Polymers. 2020; 12(11):2657. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12112657

Chicago/Turabian Style

Salas, Miguel A., Heriberto Pérez-Acebo, Verónica Calderón, and Hernán Gonzalo-Orden. 2020. "Analysis and Economic Evaluation of the Use of Recycled Polyamide Powder in Masonry Mortars" Polymers 12, no. 11: 2657. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12112657

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop