Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Synergistic effect of combining low kaolinite grade calcined clay with conventional cementitious materials

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Utilizing amorphous aluminosilicate as an alternative cementitious material has been found to enhance the properties of Portland cement (PC) when exposed to normal and aggressive media. However, the pozzolanic reactivity of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) varies, with some SCMs exhibiting high efficiency in early-age hydration and others in later ages. This trade-off often leads to a compromise in the early or later performance of hardened materials. Therefore, the main goal of this paper is to fabricate ternary, quaternary, and quinary mixtures containing commercially available amorphous silicate/aluminosilicate materials with different reactivities. These materials include low-grade metakaolin produced using Fanja (FNJ) calcined clay, silica fume (SF), fly ash (FA), and blast-furnace slag (BFS). The aim is to optimize the early and later performance of hardened PC mortars. The resistance of the hardened mortars to different aggressive attacks, such as sulfuric acid, nitric acid, and sodium sulfate/NaCl solution, was evaluated. The results revealed that replacing PC with FNJ, FNJ-SF, and FNJ-BFS, as well as FNJ-SF-FA, resulted in a significant improvement in the performance of cement mortars at both early and later ages. The ternary, quaternary, and quinary mortars demonstrated higher 7-day compressive strength than that of PC-FNJ blend. The sample with 10 wt.% FNJ and 40 wt.% BFS showed the highest 7-day compressive strength with a value higher than that of the PC-FNJ blend by 78%. Although the ternary PC-FNJ-FA, quaternary PC-FNJ-BFS-SF, and quinary PC-FNJ-BFS-FA-SF mixtures showed lower later performance compared to the PC-FNJ blend, their performance was still higher overall. Additionally, all blended mortars showed high resistivity to chloride diffusion, as simulated by the rapid chloride permeability test (RCPT). The composite materials exhibited different performances in acid and salt attacks; however, they recorded higher resistance than that of the reference sample. Overall, the findings of this study suggest that utilizing amorphous silicate/aluminosilicate materials in combination with PC can lead to improved performance in cement mortars, in terms of both early and later ages, as well as resistance to aggressive attacks such as acid and salt exposure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dunuweera SP, Rajapakse RMG (2018) Cement types, composition, uses and advantages of nanocement, environmental impact on cement production, and possible solutions. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2018:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  2. Santos TA, Cilla MS (2022) Use of asbestos cement tile waste (ACW) as mineralizer in the production of Portland cement with low CO2 emission and lower energy consumption. J Clean Prod 335:130061

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hewlett P, Liska M (Eds). (2019). Lea's chemistry of cement and concrete. Butterworth-Heinemann‏

  4. Ige OE, Olanrewaju OA, Duffy KJ, Collins OC (2022) Environmental impact analysis of Portland cement (CEM1) using the midpoint method. Energies 15(7):2708

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mohamad N, Muthusamy K, Embong R, Kusbiantoro A, Hashim MH (2022) Environmental impact of cement production and solutions: a review. Mater Today Proc 48:741–746

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chinyama MP (2011) Alternative fuels in cement manufacturing. Altern Fuel 262–284‏

  7. Schneider M (2019) The cement industry on the way to a low-carbon future. Cem Concr Res 124:105792

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Khan MMH, Havukainen J, Horttanainen M (2021) Impact of utilizing solid recovered fuel on the global warming potential of cement production and waste management system: a life cycle assessment approach. Waste Manage Res 39(4):561–572

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Adedoyin F, Ozturk I, Abubakar I, Kumeka T, Folarin O, Bekun FV (2020) Structural breaks in CO2 emissions: are they caused by climate change protests or other factors? J Environ Manage 266:110628

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. El-Attar MM, Sadek DM, Salah AM (2017) Recycling of high volumes of cement kiln dust in bricks industry. J Clean Prod 143:506–515

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Labidi I, Megriche A (2022) Natural resources exploitation in sulfate-resisting Portland cement manufacturing: towards quality improvement and reduction of environmental impact. Front Chem 10:806433

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ramón-Álvarez I, Batuecas E, Sánchez-Delgado S, Torres-Carrasco M (2023) Mechanical performance after high-temperature exposure and life cycle assessment (LCA) according to unit of stored energy of alternative mortars to Portland cement. Constr Build Mater 365:130082

    Google Scholar 

  13. Knight KA, Cunningham PR, Miller SA (2023) Optimizing supplementary cementitious material replacement to minimize the environmental impacts of concrete. Cement Concr Compos 139:105049

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Shanmuganathan R, Rath B, Almoallim HS, Alahmadi TA, Jhanani GK, Chi NTL, Manigandan S (2023) Utilisation of persistent chemical pollutant incorporating with nanoparticles to modify the properties of geopolymer and cement concrete. Environ Res 219:114965

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rao MSC, Packialakshmi S, Rath B, Alharbi SA, Alfarraj S, Praveenkumar TR, Gavurová B (2023) Utilization of agricultural, industrial waste and nanosilica as replacement for cementitious material and natural aggregates—mechanical, microstructural and durability characteristics assessment. Environ Res 231:116010

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fan X, Li Z, Zhang W, Jin H, Chen C, Liu J, Tang L (2022) Effects of different supplementary cementitious materials on the performance and environment of eco-friendly mortar prepared from waste incineration bottom ash. Constr Build Mater 356:129277

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Limbachiya MC, Meddah MS, Ouchagour Y (2012) Performance of Portland/silica fume cement concrete produced with recycled concrete aggregate. ACI Mater J 109:91–100

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Limbachiya M, Meddah MS, Ouchagour Y (2011) Use of recycled concrete aggregate in fly-ash concrete. Constr Build Mater https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.07.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meddah MS, Ismail MA, El-Gamal S, Fitriani H (2018) Performances evaluation of binary concrete designed with silica fume and metakaolin. Constr Build Mater 166:400–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.138

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gupta S, Chaudhary S (2022) State of the art review on supplementary cementitious materials in India–II: characteristics of SCMs, effect on concrete and environmental impact. J Clean Prod 357:131945

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Diaz AA, Almenares RS, Reyes TH, Irassar EF, Juenger M, Kanavaris F, Maier M, Marsh AT, Sui T, Thienel K-C, Valentini L, Wang B, Zunino F, Snellings R (2022) Properties and occurrence of clay resources for use as supplementary cementitious materials: a paper of RILEM TC 282-CCL. Mater Struct 55(5):139

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nodehi M, Ozbakkaloglu T, Gholampour A (2022) Effect of supplementary cementitious materials on properties of 3D printed conventional and alkali-activated concrete: a review. Autom Constr 138:104215

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mansour AM, Al Biajawi MI (2022) The effect of the addition of metakaolin on the fresh and hardened properties of blended cement products: a review. Mater Today Proc 66(Part 5):2811–2817‏

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Moradi N, Tavana MH, Habibi MR, Amiri M, Moradi MJ, Farhangi V (2022) Predicting the compressive strength of concrete containing binary supplementary cementitious material using machine learning approach. Materials 15(15):5336

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Zong H, Wang Y, Wang G, Li Q, Li F, Li Q, Hou P (2023) The role of ultra-fine supplementary cementitious materials in the durability and microstructure of airport pavement concrete. Constr Build Mater 392:131954

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Meddah MS (2023) Design of a non‐shrinking silica fume high‐performance concrete with recycled ceramic tile aggregate. Struct Concr 24(3):3425–3442. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.202200741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ashraf W, Borno IB, Khan RI, Siddique S, Haque MI, Tahsin A (2022) Mimicking the cementation mechanism of ancient Roman seawater concrete using calcined clays. Appl Clay Sci 230:106696

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Liu SQ, Wu C, Wang DM, Guo JP, He L (2022) Effect of seawater on hydration and sulfate resistance of noncement mortars. J Mater Civ Eng 34(8):04022178

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Taiwo RA (2022) A review on the efficiency of different supplementary cementitious materials as a partial replacement for Portland cement in concrete (Master's thesis, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment)‏

  30. Reig L, Pitarch ÁM, Soriano L, Borrachero MV, Monzó JM, Payá J, Tashima MM (2023) Reutilization of ceramic waste as supplementary cementitious material. In: Building Engineering Facing the Challenges of the 21st Century: Holistic Study from the Perspectives of Materials, Construction, Energy and Sustainability (pp 553–576). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore‏

  31. Jayswal SD, Mungule M (2022) Performance assessment of Alccofine with silica fume, fly ash and slag for development of high strength mortar. Front Struct Civ Eng 16(5):576–588

    Google Scholar 

  32. Uzal BURAK, Turanlı L, Yücel HAMDULLAH, Göncüoğlu MC, Çulfaz A (2010) Pozzolanic activity of clinoptilolite: A comparative study with silica fume, fly ash and a non-zeolitic natural pozzolan. Cem Concr Res 40(3):398–404

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Biricik H, Sarier N (2014) Comparative study of the characteristics of nano silica-, silica fume-and fly ash-incorporated cement mortars. Mater Res 17:570–582

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang S, Liang Y, Mo D, Zhang C, Xue J, Song X, Wang Y (2023) Doping silica fume enhances the mechanical strength of slag/fly ash geopolymer paste under frost attack. Minerals 13(7):925

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rivera RA, Sanjuán MÁ, Martín DA (2020) Granulated blast-furnace slag and coal fly ash ternary portland cements optimization. Sustainability 12(14):5783

    Google Scholar 

  36. Li R, Lei L, Plank J (2022) Impact of metakaolin content and fineness on the behavior of calcined clay blended cements admixed with HPEG PCE superplasticizer. Cement Concr Compos 133:104654

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Zhan P, Xu J, Wang J, Jiang C (2021) Multi-scale study on synergistic effect of cement replacement by metakaolin and typical supplementary cementitious materials on properties of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr Build Mater 307:125082

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang B, Ji T, Ma Y, Zhang Q (2022) Effect of metakaolin and magnesium oxide on flexural strength of ultra-high performance concrete. Cement Concr Compos 131:104582

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Tafraoui A, Escadeillas G, Vidal T (2016) Durability of the ultra high performances concrete containing metakaolin. Constr Build Mater 112:980–987

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Homayoonmehr R, Ramezanianpour AA, Mirdarsoltany M (2021) Influence of metakaolin on fresh properties, mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of concrete and its sustainability issues: a review. J Build Eng 44:103011

    Google Scholar 

  41. Garg R, Garg R, Eddy NO, Khan MA, Khan AH, Alomayri T, Berwal P (2023) Mechanical strength and durability analysis of mortars prepared with fly ash and nano-metakaolin. Case Stud Constr Mater 18:e01796

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hakeem IY, Althoey F, Hosen A (2022) Mechanical and durability performance of ultra-high-performance concrete incorporating SCMs. Constr Build Mater 359:129430

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Ullah R, Qiang Y, Ahmad J, Vatin NI, El-Shorbagy MA (2022) Ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC): a state-of-the-art review. Materials 15(12):4131

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Cao Y, Wang Y, Zhang Z, Ma Y, Wang H (2021) Recent progress of utilization of activated kaolinitic clay in cementitious construction materials. Compos B Eng 211:108636

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Kang SH, Kwon YH, Moon J (2022) Influence of calcination temperature of impure kaolinitic clay on hydration and strength development of ultra-high-performance cementitious composite. Constr Build Mater 326:126920

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Nduka DO, Olawuyi BJ, Cantero B, González-Fonteboa B (2023) Assessment of water transport and chemical attack of meta-illite calcined clay blended cement in high-performance concrete. Materials 16(22):7149

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Liu Y, Lu C, Hu X, Shi C (2023) Effect of silica fume on rheology of slag-fly ash-silica fume-based geopolymer pastes with different activators. Cem Concr Res 174:107336

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Johari MM, Brooks JJ, Kabir S, Rivard P (2011) Influence of supplementary cementitious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete. Constr Build Mater 25(5):2639–2648

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ferreiro S, Herfort D, Damtoft JS (2017) Effect of raw clay type, fineness, water-to-cement ratio and fly ash addition on workability and strength performance of calcined clay–limestone Portland cements. Cem Concr Res 101:1–12

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Jafari K, Rajabipour F (2021) Performance of impure calcined clay as a pozzolan in concrete. Transp Res Rec 2675(2):98–107

    Google Scholar 

  51. Olofinnade O, Ogara J (2021) Workability, strength, and microstructure of high strength sustainable concrete incorporating recycled clay brick aggregate and calcined clay. Clean Eng Technol 3:100123

    Google Scholar 

  52. Meddah MS (2015) Durability performance and engineering properties of shale and volcanic ashes concretes. Constr Build Mater 79:73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Meddah MS, Benkari N, Al-Saadi SN, Al MY (2020) Sarooj mortar: from a traditional building material to an engineered Pozzolan—mechanical and thermal properties study. J Build Eng 32:101754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Meddah MS, Al-Owaisi MS, Hago AW (2022) Engineering properties of mortar containing calcined clay as a supplementary cementitious material. In: International Conference on Sustainability: Developments and Innovations, February 19th to 22nd, 2022, Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1026 (2022) 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1026/1/012015

  55. Avet F, Scrivener K (2018) Investigation of the calcined kaolinite content on the hydration of limestone calcined clay cement (LC3). Cem Concr Res 107:124–135

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Lee NK, An GH, Koh KT, Ryu GS (2016) Improved reactivity of fly ash-slag geopolymer by the addition of silica fume. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2016:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2192053

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Kumar S, Rai B (2022) Synergetic effect of fly ash and silica fume on the performance of high volume fly ash self-compacting concrete. J Struct Integr Maint 7(1):61–74

    Google Scholar 

  58. Han F, Zhang Z, Wang D, Yan P (2015) Hydration heat evolution and kinetics of blended cement containing steel slag at different temperatures. Thermochim Acta 605:43–51

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Hallet V, Pedersen MT, Lothenbach B, Winnefeld F, De Belie N, Pontikes Y (2022) Hydration of blended cement with high volume iron-rich slag from non-ferrous metallurgy. Cem Concr Res 151:106624

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Fu X, Wang Z, Tao W, Yang C, Hou W, Dong Y, Wu X (2002) Studies on blended cement with a large amount of fly ash. Cem Concr Res 32(7):1153–1159

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Shi C, Wang D, Wu L, Wu Z (2015) The hydration and microstructure of ultra high-strength concrete with cement–silica fume–slag binder. Cement Concr Compos 61:44–52

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Chen W, Dang J, Du H (2022) Using low-grade calcined clay to develop low-carbon and lightweight strain-hardening cement composites. J Build Eng 58:105023

    Google Scholar 

  63. Abdalla A, Mohammed AS (2022) Hybrid MARS-, MEP-, and ANN-based prediction for modeling the compressive strength of cement mortar with various sand size and clay mineral metakaolin content. Arch Civ Mech Eng 22(4):194

    Google Scholar 

  64. Meddah MS, Al Owaisi M, Abedi M, Hago AW (2023) Mortar and concrete with lime-rich calcined clay pozzolana: a sustainable approach to enhancing performances and reducing carbon footprint. Constr Build Mater 393:132098

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Kim BJ, Lee GW, Choi YC (2022) Hydration and mechanical properties of high-volume fly ash concrete with nano-silica and silica fume. Materials 15(19):6599

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Xi J, Liu J, Yang K, Zhang S, Han F, Sha J, Zheng X (2022) Role of silica fume on hydration and strength development of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr Build Mater 338:127600

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Heikal M, Abdel-Gawwad HA, Ababneh FA (2018) Positive impact performance of hybrid effect of nano-clay and silica nano-particles on composite cements. Constr Build Mater 190:508–516

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Mohsen A, Abdel-Gawwad HA, Ramadan M (2020) Performance, radiation shielding, and anti-fungal activity of alkali-activated slag individually modified with zinc oxide and zinc ferrite nano-particles. Constr Build Mater 257:119584

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Abdel-Gawwad HA, Sanad SA, Mohammed MS (2020) A clean approach through sustainable utilization of cement kiln dust, hazardous lead-bearing, and sewage sludges in the production of lightweight bricks. J Clean Prod 273:123129

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Abdel-Gawwad HA, Abd El-Aleem S, Zayed A (2021) Stabilization of hazardous lead glass sludge using reactive magnesia via the fabrication of lightweight building bricks. J Hazard Mater 403:124017

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Kim W, Choi H, Lee T (2023) Residual compressive strength prediction model for concrete subject to high temperatures using ultrasonic pulse velocity. Materials 16(2):515

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Mata R, Ruiz RO, Nuñez E (2023) Correlation between compressive strength of concrete and ultrasonic pulse velocity: a case of study and a new correlation method. Constr Build Mater 369:130569

    Google Scholar 

  73. Liu H, Zhao X (2022) Thermal conductivity analysis of high porosity structures with open and closed pores. Int J Heat Mass Transf 183:122089

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Abdel-Gawwad HA, Mohammed MS, Heikal M (2020) Ultra-lightweight porous materials fabrication and hazardous lead-stabilization through alkali-activation/sintering of different industrial solid wastes. J Clean Prod 244:118742

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Motisariya K, Agrawal G, Baria M, Srivastava V, Dave N (2023) Experimental analysis of strength and durability properties of cement binders and mortars with addition of microfine sewage sludge ash (SSA) particles. Mater Today Proc‏

  76. Wan X, Cui Y, Jin Z, Gao L (2023) Chloride transport and related influencing factors of alkali-activated materials: a review. Materials 16(11):3979

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Chen K, Dazhi W, Fei S, Pan C, Shen X, Zhang C, Juntao H (2022) Resistance of blended alkali-activated fly ash-OPC mortar to mild-concentration sulfuric and acetic acid attack. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(17):25694–25708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17555-7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Li Z, Ikeda K (2023) Influencing factors of sulfuric acid resistance of ca-rich alkali-activated materials. Materials 16(6):2473

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Wang A, Zheng Y, Zhang Z, Liu K, Li Y, Shi L, Sun D (2020) The durability of alkali-activated materials in comparison with ordinary Portland cements and concretes: a review. Engineering 6(6):695–706

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Wang Y, Cao Y, Zhang Z, Zhang P, Ma Y, Wang A, Wang H (2023) Intrinsic sulfuric acid resistance of C–(N)–ASH and NASH gels produced by alkali-activation of synthetic calcium aluminosilicate precursors. Cem Concr Res 165:107068

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Aiken TA, Gu L, Kwasny J, Huseien GF, McPolin D, Sha W (2022) Acid resistance of alkali-activated binders: a review of performance, mechanisms of deterioration and testing procedures. Constr Build Mater 342:128057

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Dorn T, Hirsch T, Stephan D (2023) Working mechanism of calcium nitrate as an accelerator for Portland cement hydration. J Am Ceram Soc 106(1):752–766

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Xu Y, He T, Ma X (2022) The influence of calcium nitrate/sodium nitrate on the hydration process of cement paste mixed with alkali free liquid accelerator. Constr Build Mater 347:128555

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Abdel-Gawwad HA, Heikal M, Mohammed MS, Abd El-Aleem S, Hassan HS, García SV, Rashad AM (2019) Evaluating the impact of nano-magnesium calcite waste on the performance of cement mortar in normal and sulfate-rich media. Constr Build Mater 203:392–400

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Ellien AR, Etman ZA, Nasser AA (2023) Enhancement of concrete mixed or cured with sea water using fly ash and Metakaolin. ERJ Eng Res J 46(1):133–142

    Google Scholar 

  86. He W, Li B, Meng X, Shen Q (2023) Compound effects of sodium chloride and gypsum on the compressive strength and sulfate resistance of slag-based geopolymer concrete. Buildings 13(3):675

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work reported herein received some financial funding from His Majesty Trust Fund (HMTF) grant number SR/ENG/CAED/21/01. The authors are thankful for this fund's support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil & Architectural Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, 123, Al-Khod, Oman

    Mohammed Seddik Meddah, Hamdy A. Abdel-Gawwad, Ola Najjar, Sherif El-Gamal, Khalifa Al-Jabri & Abdul Wahid Hago

  2. Raw Building Materials and Processing Technology Research Institute, Housing and Building National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt

    Hamdy A. Abdel-Gawwad

Authors
  1. Mohammed Seddik Meddah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamdy A. Abdel-Gawwad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ola Najjar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sherif El-Gamal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Khalifa Al-Jabri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Abdul Wahid Hago
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed Seddik Meddah.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not applicable as it does not involve any human testing.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meddah, M.S., Abdel-Gawwad, H.A., Najjar, O. et al. Synergistic effect of combining low kaolinite grade calcined clay with conventional cementitious materials. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 9, 163 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-024-01441-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-024-01441-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation