Practical applications of mortars using cattle bone ash as partial cement replacement

Hongseok Yang; Jeonghyun Kim; Namho Kim

doi:10.7764/RDLC.24.3.632

Authors

Hongseok Yang School of Industrial Design and Architectural Engineering, Korea University of Technology and Education, Cheonan (Republic of Korea)
Jeonghyun Kim Faculty of Civil Engineering, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Wrocław (Poland)
Namho Kim School of Industrial Design and Architectural Engineering, Korea University of Technology and Education, Cheonan (Republic of Korea)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.24.3.632

Keywords:

Bone ash mortar, green cement, sustainable development, new supplementary cementitious material.

Abstract

In this study, commercially available cattle bone ash (CBA) was utilized as a partial cement replacement to evaluate its near-term and practical applicability in mortar production. CBA was incorporated into mortar by replacing Portland cement in 5% increments, up to a maximum of 30%. The research assessed both the fresh properties (such as table flow) and the hardened properties (including density, water absorption, compressive strength, drying shrinkage, and ultrasonic pulse velocity) of the mortar. The findings showed that while increasing CBA replacement rates generally led to a decline in mortar properties, replacements up to 10% had negligible effects. Specifically, mortar with a 10% CBA replacement exhibited a density only 0.1% lower than that of standard mortar, a 7-day compressive strength 2.3% higher, and a 28-day compressive strength 3.8% lower. Furthermore, even with 30% of Portland cement replaced by CBA, the mortar still met industry standards for both 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths, making it suitable for applications in brick and flooring. These findings highlight the feasibility of using CBA as a supplementary cementitious material and provide practical guidance for its rapid field application.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ASTM C109. (2021). Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars. ASTM International.

ASTM C230. (2020). Specification for Flow Table for Use in Tests of Hydraulic Cement. ASTM International. https://doi.org/10.1520/C0230_C0230M-20

ASTM C305. (2020). Standard Practice for Mechanical Mixing of Hydraulic Cement Pastes and Mortars of Plastic Consistency. ASTM International.

ASTM C596. (2018). Standard Test Method for Drying Shrinkage of Mortar Containing Hydraulic Cement. ASTM International.

ASTM C597. (2016). Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through Concrete. ASTM International.

Bhirud, Y., Vaidya, O., More, S., Shaikh, A., Pawar, A., Pawar, L., & Yeole, P. (2025). Shrinkage behaviour of self-compacting concrete with higher binder content: experimental results and predictive equation. Discover Materials, 5(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43939-025-00184-z

Burbano-Garcia, C., Lopez, M., Araya-Letelier, G., Silva, Y. F., Zúñiga, S., & González, M. (2025). Short/long term assessment of precast concrete block waste as a supplementary cementitious material: mechanical performance, hydration, and microstructure evolution. Journal of Building Engineer-ing, 112, 113868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2025.113868

Cyr, M., & Ludmann, C. (2006). Low risk meat and bone meal (MBM) bottom ash in mortars as sand replacement. Cement and Concrete Research, 36(3), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2005.09.009

Duvallet, T. Y., & Jewell, R. B. (2023). Recycling of bone ash from animal wastes and by‐products in the production of novel cements. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 106(6), 3720–3735. https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.19005

Editorial. (2021, September 30). Concrete needs to lose its colossal carbon footprint. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02612-5

Farahzadi, L., Bozorgmehr Nia, S., Shafei, B., & Kioumarsi, M. (2025). Sustainability assessment of ultra-high performance concrete made with vari-ous supplementary cementitious materials. Cleaner Materials, 15, 100301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clema.2025.100301

Gökşen, Y., Durak, U., İlkentapar, S., İsa Atabey, İ., Kaya, M., Karahan, O., & Duran Atis‬, C. (2023). Synergistic effect of waste glass powder and fly ash on some properties of mortar and notably suppressing alkali-silica reaction. Revista de La Construcción, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.22.2.419

Gokulkannan, N., Manju, R., & Sasikumar, P. (2024). Enhancing the mechanical properties of fibre reinforced concrete using diatomaceous earth powder: fresh and hardened properties of concrete. Revista de La Construcción, 23(3), 457–479. https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.23.3.457

Guo, X., Yuan, S., Xu, Y., & Qian, G. (2022). Effects of phosphorus and iron on the composition and property of Portland cement clinker utilized in-cinerated sewage sludge ash. Construction and Building Materials, 341, 127754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127754

Hemalatha, T., & Ramaswamy, A. (2017). A review on fly ash characteristics – Towards promoting high volume utilization in developing sustainable concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 546–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.114

Jayathilakan, K., Sultana, K., Radhakrishna, K., & Bawa, A. S. (2012). Utilization of byproducts and waste materials from meat, poultry and fish pro-cessing industries: a review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 49(3), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0290-7

Juenger, M. C. G., Snellings, R., & Bernal, S. A. (2019). Supplementary cementitious materials: New sources, characterization, and performance in-sights. Cement and Concrete Research, 122, 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.05.008

Kim, J., Lee, D., Sičáková, A., & Kim, N. (2023). Utilization of Different Forms of Demolished Clay Brick and Granite Wastes for Better Performance in Cement Composites. Buildings, 13(1), 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13010165

Kim, J., Lee, D., & Ubysz, A. (2024). Investigating the effect of elevated temperatures on the utilization of demolished paving block powders as sup-plementary cementitious materials. Revista de La Construcción, 23(1), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.23.1.151

Kim, J., Nciri, N., Sicakova, A., & Kim, N. (2023). Characteristics of waste concrete powders from multi-recycled coarse aggregate concrete and their effects as cement replacements. Construction and Building Materials, 398, 132525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132525

KS L5201. (2016). Portland cement. Korean Agency for Technology and Standards.

KS L5220. (2018). Dry ready mixed cement mortar. Korean Agency for Technology and Standards.

Kumar, M., Singh, N. P., Singh, S. K., & Singh, N. B. (2012). Tertiary biocomposite cement and its hydration. Construction and Building Materials, 29, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.09.017

Obianyo, I. I., Onwualu, A. P., & Soboyejo, A. B. O. (2020). Mechanical behaviour of lateritic soil stabilized with bone ash and hydrated lime for sus-tainable building applications. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 12, e00331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2020.e00331

Oinam, Y., Dahal, M., Mesfin, M., Park, S., Kim, H.-K., & Pyo, S. (2024). On improved microstructure properties of slag-based UHPC incorporating cal-cium formate and calcium chloride. Journal of Building Engineering, 90, 109551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109551

Oluwafemi, J., Ofuyatan, O., Adedeji, A., Bankole, D., & Justin, L. (2023). Reliability assessment of ground granulated blast furnace slag/ cow bone ash- based geopolymer concrete. Journal of Building Engineering, 64, 105620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105620

Özbay, E., Erdemir, M., & Durmuş, H. İ. (2016). Utilization and efficiency of ground granulated blast furnace slag on concrete properties – A review. Construction and Building Materials, 105, 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.153

Palomino-Guzmán, E. R., González-López, A., Olmedo-Montoya, J., Sanchez-Echeverri, L. A., & Tovar-Perilla, N. J. (2024). A Sustainable Approach Us-ing Beef and Pig Bone Waste as a Cement Replacement to Produce Concrete. Sustainability, 16(2), 701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020701

Snellings, R., Suraneni, P., & Skibsted, J. (2023). Future and emerging supplementary cementitious materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 171, 107199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2023.107199

Staněk, T., Sulovský, P., & Boháč, M. (2020). Mechanism and kinetics of binding of meat and bone meal ash into the Portland cement clinker. SN Ap-plied Sciences, 2(3), 411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2215-4

Tran, N. P., Gunasekara, C., Law, D. W., Houshyar, S., Setunge, S., & Cwirzen, A. (2021). A critical review on drying shrinkage mitigation strategies in cement-based materials. Journal of Building Engineering, 38, 102210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102210

UNEP. (2023). Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future. United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosys-tems + Architecture. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/43293

Wang, H., Qi, T., Feng, G., Wen, X., Wang, Z., Shi, X., & Du, X. (2021). Effect of partial substitution of corn straw fly ash for fly ash as supplementary cementitious material on the mechanical properties of cemented coal gangue backfill. Construction and Building Materials, 280, 122553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122553

Yamanel, K., Durak, U., İlkentapa, S., İsa Atabey, İ., Karahan, O., & Duran Atiş, C. (2019). Influence of waste marble powder as a replacement of ce-ment on the properties of mortar. Revista de La Construcción, 18(2), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.18.2.290