Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T10:36:50.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Mechanical Activation on the Pozzolanic Activity of Muscovite

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Geng Yao ,
Haoyu Zang ,
Junxiang Wang ,
Peng Wu ,
Jun Qiu  and
Xianjun Lyu Open the ORCID record for Xianjun Lyu [Opens in a new window]
Geng Yao
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
Haoyu Zang
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
Junxiang Wang
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
Peng Wu
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
Jun Qiu
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
Xianjun Lyu*
Affiliation:
College of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
*
*E-mail address of corresponding author: lyuxianjun@163.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to provide a theoretical foundation for the utilization of tailings as supplementary cementitious materials, the pozzolanic activity of muscovite—a typical mineral phase in tailings—before and after mechanical activation was investigated. In this study, significant pozzolanic activity of muscovite was obtained as a result of the structural and morphological changes that were induced by mechanical activation. The activated muscovite that was obtained after mechanical activation for 160 min satisfies the requirements for use as an active supplementary cementitious material, and the main characteristics of the pozzolana were as follows: median particle size (D50) of 11.7 μm, BET specific surface area of 28.82 m2 g−1, relative crystallinity of 14.99%, and pozzolanic activity index of 94.36%. Continuous grinding led to a gradual reduction in the relative crystallinity and an increase in the pozzolanic activity index due to the dehydroxylation reaction induced by mechanical activation, which occurred despite the fact that the specific surface area showed a decreasing trend when the grinding time was prolonged. Mechanically activated muscovite exhibited the capacity to react with calcium hydroxide to form calcium silicate hydrate, which is a typical characteristic of pozzolana. This experimental study provided a theoretical basis for evaluating the pozzolanic activity of muscovite using mechanical activation.

Keywords

Mechanical activationMuscovitePozzolanic activitySupplementary Cementitious Material
Type
Original Paper
Information
Clays and Clay Minerals , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , June 2019 , pp. 209 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Clay Minerals Society 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alex, T. C., Kumar, R., Roy, S. K., & Mehrotra, S. P. (2014). Mechanically induced reactivity of gibbsite: Part 1. Planetary milling. Powder Technology, 264(3), 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alujas, A., Fernández, R., Quintana, R., Scrivener, K. L., & Martirena, F. (2015). Pozzolanic reactivity of low grade kaolinitic clays: Influence of calcination temperature and impact of calcination products on OPC hydration. Applied Clay Science, 108, 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrić, L., Terzić, A., & Aćimović, Z. (2014). Comparative kinetic study of mechanical activation process of mica and talc for industrial application. Composites Part B Engineering, 59(59), 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argane, R., Benzaazoua, M., Hakkou, R., & Bouamrane, A. (2015). Reuse of base-metal tailings as aggregates for rendering mortars: Assessment of immobilization performances and environmental behavior. Construction & Building Materials, 96(9), 296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bian, Z., Miao, X., Lei, S., Chen, S. E., Wang, W., & Struthers, S. (2012). The challenges of reusing mining and mineral-processing wastes. Science, 337(6095), 702–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, Y., Huang, F., Li, W., Liu, R., Li, G., & Wei, J. (2016). Test research on the effects of mechanochemically activated iron tailings on the compressive strength of concrete. Construction & Building Materials, 118, 164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dandurand, J. L., Gout, R., & Schott, J. (1982). Experiments on phase transformations and chemical reactions of mechanically activated minerals by grinding: Petrogenetic implications. Tectonophysics, 83(3), 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gridi, F. (2008). Structural transformations of muscovite at high temperature by X-ray and neutron diffraction. Applied Clay Science, 38(3–4), 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guggenheim, S., Chang, Y.-H., & Koster van Groos, A. F. (1987). Muscovite dehydroxylation: high-temperature studies. American Mineralogist, 72(5–6), 537–550.Google Scholar
Ilić, B., Radonjanin, V., Malešev, M., Zdujić, M., & Mitrović, A. (2016). Effects of mechanical and thermal activation on pozzolanic activity of kaolin containing mica. Applied Clay Science, 123, 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitamura, M., & Senna, M. (2001). Electrorheological properties of mechanically activated gibbsite. International Journal of Inorganic Materials, 3(6), 563–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kodama, H., & Brydon, J. E. (1968). Dehydroxylation of microcrystalline muscovite. Kinetics, mechanism and energy change. Transactions of the Faraday Society, 64, 3112–3119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C., Sun, H., Yi, Z., & Li, L. (2010a). Innovative methodology for comprehensive utilization of iron ore tailings: Part 2: The residues after iron recovery from iron ore tailings to prepare cementitious material. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 174(1–3), 78–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, C., Wan, J., Sun, H., & Li, L. (2010b). Investigation on the activation of coal gangue by a new compound method. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 179(1–3), 515–520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lothenbach, B., Scrivener, K., & Hooton, R. D. (2011). Supplementary cementitious materials. Cement & Concrete Research, 41(12), 1244–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwig, H. M., & Zhang, W. (2015). Research review of cement clinker chemistry. Cement & Concrete Research, 78, 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makó, É., Frost, R. L., Kristóf, J., & Horváth, E. (2001). The effect of quartz content on the mechanochemical activation of kaolinite. Journal of Colloid & Interface Science, 244(2), 359–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzucato, E., Artioli, G., & Gualtieri, A. (1999). High temperature dehydroxylation of muscovite-2M 1: A kinetic study by in situ XRPD. Physics & Chemistry of Minerals, 26(5), 375–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitrović, A., & Zdujić, M. (2014). Preparation of pozzolanic addition by mechanical treatment of kaolin clay. International Journal of Mineral Processing, 132, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moura, W. A., Gonçalves, J. P., & Lima, M. B. L. (2007). Copper slag waste as a supplementary cementing material to concrete. Journal of Materials Science, 42(7), 2226–2230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozlem, C., Iffet Yakar, E., & Sabriye, P. (2006). Utilization of gold tailings as an additive in Portland cement. Waste Management & Research the Journal of the International Solid Wastes & Public Cleansing Association Iswa, 24(3), 215.Google Scholar
Papirer, E., Eckhardt, A., Muller, F., & Yvon, J. (1990). Grinding of muscovite: Influence of the grinding medium. Journal of Materials Science, 25(12), 5109–5117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, J. M., Roessler, J. G., Ferraro, C. C., Deford, H. D., & Townsend, T. G. (2016). A review of waste products utilized as supplements to Portland cement in concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrin-Sarazin, F., Sepehr, M., Bouaricha, S., & Denault, J. (2010). Potential of ball milling to improve clay dispersion in nanocomposites. Polymer Engineering & Science, 49(4), 651–665.Google Scholar
Price, J. G. (2016). The world is changing. GSA today: a publication of the Geological Society of America, 26(1), 4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, C., Jiménez, A. F., & Palomo, A. (2011). New cements for the 21st century: The pursuit of an alternative to Portland cement. Cement & Concrete Research, 41(7), 750–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, J., Zhang, Y., & Bao, S. (2016). The influence of roasting temperature on the flotation properties of muscovite. Minerals, 6(2), 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokiwai, K., & Nakashima, S. (2010). Dehydration kinetics of muscovite by in situ infrared microspectroscopy. Physics & Chemistry of Minerals, 37(2), 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vargas, F., & Lopez, M. (2018). Development of a new supplementary cementitious material from the activation of copper tailings: Mechanical performance and analysis of factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vizcayno, C., Gutiérrez, R. M. D., Castello, R., Rodriguez, E., & Guerrero, C. E. (2010). Pozzolan obtained by mechanochemical and thermal treatments of kaolin. Applied Clay Science, 49(4), 405–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, G., Liu, Q., Wang, J., Wu, P., & Lyu, X. (2019). Effect of mechanical grinding on pozzolanic activity and hydration properties of siliceous gold ore tailings. Journal of Cleaner Production, 217, 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yüksel, $ID. (2018). A review of steel slag usage in construction industry for sustainable development. Environment Development & Sustainability, 19(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
Zhang, M., Redfern, S. A. T., Salje, E. K. H., Carpenter, M. A., & Hayward, C. L. (2010). Thermal behavior of vibrational phonons and hydroxyls of muscovite in dehydroxylation: In situ high-temperature infrared spectroscopic investigations. American Mineralogist, 95(10), 1444–1457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar