A Comparative Analysis of the Properties of Coal Liquefaction Residues and Limestone Fine Aggregates.
Saved in:
| Title: | A Comparative Analysis of the Properties of Coal Liquefaction Residues and Limestone Fine Aggregates. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Wu, Hao1 (AUTHOR), Wang, Zhe2,3 (AUTHOR), Li, Pengfei3,4 (AUTHOR), Li, Mingliang1,4 (AUTHOR), Li, Jun1,5 (AUTHOR), Guo, Shuangfeng1,3,5 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Materials (1996-1944). May2026, Vol. 19 Issue 10, p1994. 21p. |
| Subjects: | Coal liquefaction, Limestone, Porosity, Vickers hardness, Ecological impact, Mechanical behavior of materials, Elastic modulus |
| Abstract: | Coal liquefaction residues (CLRs), including both indirect (ICLR) and direct (DCLR) variants, represent industrial by-products whose conventional landfill disposal raises environmental concerns. This study comparatively analyzes ICLR and DCLR properties against limestone fine aggregates through physicochemical characterization. Results indicate that ICLR contains predominant SiO2 crystalline phases (50.05%) with trace Fe-Ti-Al-Mg oxides, demonstrating higher Vickers hardness (615 HV vs. 246 HV for limestone) and elastic modulus (98 GPa vs. 81 GPa for limestone), while its apparent relative density (2.612) closely matches that of limestone (2.783). Conversely, DCLR features abundant carbonaceous components (75.9% C) with olefinic/aromatic structures (asphaltene content 66.2%), exhibiting lower mechanical strength (Vickers hardness 21 HV) but enhanced asphalt affinity, as indicated by strong C=C (1591 cm−1) and aromatic C–H (744 cm−1) absorption peaks in FTIR. Both CLRs share comparable gradation curves and micromorphological characteristics with limestone aggregates, including uniform surface scaly textures. While pore-size distributions differ minimally between CLRs, both present finer porosity than limestone and show no leachate toxicity risks, confirming their viability as sustainable alternatives to asphalt fine aggregates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Materials (1996-1944) is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Coal liquefaction residues (CLRs), including both indirect (ICLR) and direct (DCLR) variants, represent industrial by-products whose conventional landfill disposal raises environmental concerns. This study comparatively analyzes ICLR and DCLR properties against limestone fine aggregates through physicochemical characterization. Results indicate that ICLR contains predominant SiO2 crystalline phases (50.05%) with trace Fe-Ti-Al-Mg oxides, demonstrating higher Vickers hardness (615 HV vs. 246 HV for limestone) and elastic modulus (98 GPa vs. 81 GPa for limestone), while its apparent relative density (2.612) closely matches that of limestone (2.783). Conversely, DCLR features abundant carbonaceous components (75.9% C) with olefinic/aromatic structures (asphaltene content 66.2%), exhibiting lower mechanical strength (Vickers hardness 21 HV) but enhanced asphalt affinity, as indicated by strong C=C (1591 cm−1) and aromatic C–H (744 cm−1) absorption peaks in FTIR. Both CLRs share comparable gradation curves and micromorphological characteristics with limestone aggregates, including uniform surface scaly textures. While pore-size distributions differ minimally between CLRs, both present finer porosity than limestone and show no leachate toxicity risks, confirming their viability as sustainable alternatives to asphalt fine aggregates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 19961944 |
| DOI: | 10.3390/ma19101994 |
