Aubert J E, Husson B, Sarramone N
Laboratoire Matériaux et Durabilité des Constructions (L.M.D.C.), INSA-UPS, 135 Avenue de Rangueil, 31077 Toulouse Cedex 4, France.
J Hazard Mater. 2006 Aug 25;136(3):624-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.12.041. Epub 2006 Jan 25.
This paper is the first of a series of two articles dealing with the processes applied to MSWI fly ash with a view to reusing it safely in cement-based materials. Part 1 presents two stabilization processes and Part 2 deals with the use of the two treated fly ashes (TFA) in mortars. Two types of binder were used: an Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) containing more than 95% clinker (CEM I 52.5R) and a binary blend cement composed of 70% ground granulated blast furnace slag and 30% clinker (CEM III-B 42.5N). In this first part, two stabilization processes are presented: the conventional process, called "A", based on the washing, phosphation and calcination of the ash, and a modified process, called "B", intended to eliminate metallic aluminum and sulfate contained in the ash. The physical, chemical and mineralogical characteristics of the two TFA were comparable. The main differences observed were those expected, i.e. TFA-B was free of metallic aluminum and sulfate. The mineralogical characterization of the two TFAs highlighted the presence of large amounts of a calcium aluminosilicate phase taking two forms, a crystalline form (gehlenite) and an amorphous form. Hydration studies on pastes containing mixed TFA and calcium hydroxide showed that this phase reacted with calcium hydroxide to form calcium aluminate hydrates. This formation of hydrates was accompanied by a hardening of the pastes. These results are very encouraging for the reuse of such TFA in cement-based materials because they can be considered as pozzolanic additions and could advantageously replace a part of the cement in cement-based materials. Finally, leaching tests were carried out to evaluate the environmental impact of the two TFAs. The elements which were less efficiently stabilized by process A were zinc, cadmium and antimony but, when the results of the leaching tests were compared with the thresholds of the European landfill directive, TFA-A could nevertheless be accepted at landfills for non-hazardous waste. The modifications of the process led to a significant reduction in the stabilization of chromium, selenium and antimony.
本文是关于将城市固体废弃物焚烧飞灰进行处理以便在水泥基材料中安全再利用的系列两篇文章中的第一篇。第1部分介绍了两种稳定化处理工艺,第2部分探讨了两种处理后的飞灰(TFA)在砂浆中的应用。使用了两种类型的胶凝材料:一种是熟料含量超过95%的普通硅酸盐水泥(OPC,CEM I 52.5R),另一种是由70%的磨细粒化高炉矿渣和30%的熟料组成的二元混合水泥(CEM III-B 42.5N)。在这第一部分中,介绍了两种稳定化处理工艺:传统工艺,称为“A”,基于飞灰的水洗、磷酸化和煅烧;以及一种改进工艺,称为“B”,旨在去除飞灰中所含的金属铝和硫酸盐。两种TFA的物理、化学和矿物学特性具有可比性。观察到的主要差异是预期中的差异,即TFA-B不含金属铝和硫酸盐。两种TFA的矿物学表征突出显示存在大量以两种形式存在的钙铝硅酸盐相,一种是晶体形式(钙黄长石),另一种是非晶形式。对含有混合TFA和氢氧化钙的浆体进行的水化研究表明,该相与氢氧化钙反应形成铝酸钙水化物。水化物的形成伴随着浆体的硬化。这些结果对于此类TFA在水泥基材料中的再利用非常令人鼓舞,因为它们可被视为火山灰质掺合料,并且可以有利地替代水泥基材料中的部分水泥。最后,进行了浸出试验以评估两种TFA的环境影响。工艺A对锌、镉和锑的稳定化效果较差,但是,当将浸出试验结果与欧洲垃圾填埋指令的限值进行比较时,TFA-A仍可在非危险废物填埋场被接受。工艺的改进导致铬、硒和锑的稳定化程度显著降低。