Next Article in Journal
Plant-Based Extracts as Reducing, Capping, and Stabilizing Agents for the Green Synthesis of Inorganic Nanoparticles
Next Article in Special Issue
From Your Plate to Our Bin: Tackling Food Waste in Saudi Family Restaurants
Previous Article in Journal
Spondias tuberosa and Spondias mombin: Nutritional Composition, Bioactive Compounds, Biological Activity and Technological Applications
Previous Article in Special Issue
Environmental and Economic Life Cycle Assessment of Enzymatic Hydrolysis-Based Fish Protein and Oil Extraction
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Use of Phosphogypsum as a Source of Raw Materials for Gypsum-Based Materials

by
Kseniya Levickaya
1,2,
Nataliya Alfimova
2,*,
Ivan Nikulin
3,4,
Natalia Kozhukhova
1,5 and
Aleksander Buryanov
6
1
Laboratory of Advanced Materials and Technologies, Belgorod National Research University, 85 Pobedy Str., 308015 Belgorod, Russia
2
Department of Building Materials Science, Products and Structures, Belgorod State Technological University Named after V.G. Shukhov, 46 Kostyukova Str., 308012 Belgorod, Russia
3
Engineering Center NRU “BelSU”, Belgorod, 2a/712, Koroleva Str., 308033 Belgorod, Russia
4
Fund of Innovative Scientific Technologies, 1, Room 3.3 Perspektivnaya Str. (Novosadovy mkr.), Belgorod Region, Belgorod District, Novosadovy Settlement, 308518 Belgorod, Russia
5
Department of Material Science and Material Technology, Belgorod State Technological University Named after V.G. Shukhov, 46 Kostyukova Str., 308012 Belgorod, Russia
6
Department of Building Materials Science, Moscow State University of Civil Engineering (National Research University), 6, Yaroslavskoye Shosse, 129337 Moscow, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Resources 2024, 13(5), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050069
Submission received: 20 March 2024 / Revised: 7 May 2024 / Accepted: 10 May 2024 / Published: 14 May 2024

Abstract

:
Gypsum binders and the products based on them are widely in demand in the construction materials market, which is due to their easy production technology, lower energy consumption, and low environmental impact in relation to Portland cement. Not only natural gypsum (NG), but also phosphogypsum (PG), which is a by-product of the synthesis of orthophosphoric acid from phosphorite rock, can be used as a source of raw materials for the production of gypsum materials. PG is produced annually in large quantities throughout the world. In chemical composition, PG mainly consists of calcium sulfate dihydrate CaSO4·2H2O, so it is a good potential analogue of natural gypsum, which is used as the main component of gypsum building materials. Thus, the useful recycling of PG as a technogenic resource with valuable properties will expand the raw material base for the production of gypsum materials. This approach to handling technogenic resources fits well with the principles of a circular economy. However, like any technogenic resource, PGs from different enterprises normally differ in their deposits of the original phosphate rock and production technologies. Therefore, PG contains a large number of undesirable impurities, the proportion and composition of which vary over a wide range. This feature does not allow for predicting the properties of PG-based materials without a preliminary detailed study of PG. This research was aimed at carrying out a comprehensive study of the characteristics of PGs from three different industrial plants to evaluate their relationship with the properties of gypsum materials based on them. It was found that PGs have significant differences in their structural and morphological characteristics both in relation to each other and in relation to NG. Also, binders based on PG and NG have significant differences in their physical properties. The average density, compressive strength, and flexural strength for the PG binders with equal workability are lower than those of NG binders. At a water/solid ratio (W/S) < 0.7, all PG binders exhibit comparable compressive strength to NG binders. Thus, PG can act as an alternative to natural gypsum in gypsum binders.

1. Introduction

Gypsum-based materials (plasterboard, blocks, plaster, etc.) are widely in demand in the building materials market due to their easy manufacture, as well as their good physical and mechanical properties (fire resistance, low sound and thermal conductivity, light weight, etc.) [1,2,3]. It should also be noted that the production of gypsum binders, in comparison with Portland cement, is lower energy consumptive and is also not accompanied by the emissions of harmful impurities and CO2 into the environment [4,5] (Equation (1)).
CaSO4·2H2O = β-CaSO4·0.5H2O + 1.5H2O
Normally, natural gypsum (NG) is used for the production of gypsum binders. However, in countries where deposits of NG are limited, gypsum-bearing wastes from various industrial enterprises, such as phosphogypsum, citrogypsum, FGD-gypsum, etc., can be used as an alternative source for gypsum binder production [6,7,8,9,10]. The most large-tonnage of the above-mentioned wastes is phosphogypsum (PG), the annual production of which in the world is ≈300 million tons [8,9,10,11,12].
PG is a primary by-product formed during the production of phosphoric acid and an intermediate product in the production of phosphate fertilizers from phosphate rock (calcium phosphate or apatite) [9,10,11,12].
Only 15% of all phosphogypsum produced in the world is recycled; the remaining volume is stored or dumped into water reservoirs, which causes significant damage to the environment [12]. In this connection, the search for ways to use PG as a resource for the production of gypsum binders is a promised trend that will solve the environmental problems in regions where there are accumulations of FG, but will also expand their raw material base for the production of gypsum materials. This concept is in agreement with the principles of the circular economy.
Despite the fact that PG is mainly represented by calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO4 2H2O) (Reaction (2)) [13], it also contains impurities of phosphorus, fluorine, organic substances, heavy metals, radioactive substances, etc. [11,14], which can have an ambiguous effect on the quality of gypsum materials. Therefore, PG, as a gypsum-bearing resource, requires additional, more detailed study.
Ca5(PO4)3F + 5H2SO4 + 10H2O → 3H3PO4 + 5CaSO4·2H2O + HF
There are a large number of studies where the authors have shown the possibility of obtaining PG-based binders by the heat treatment of phosphogypsum. In particular, according to a number of works studying PG from different countries (China, India, Russian Federation) as a raw material for β-CaSO4 0.5H2O, produced by high-temperature treatment in range of 140–220 °C, it has been established that, despite comparable conditions for the production of PG binders, the compressive strength varies from 4 to 13.8 MPa. There are also significant differences in the setting time [15,16,17,18,19,20].
This suggests that the quality of PG binders and the gypsum materials based on them is significantly influenced by the origin characteristics of the PG, such as mineralogical and chemical composition, impurities, grain size, etc. In turn, these characteristics depend on the technological parameters of orthophosphoric acid production, as well as the origin of the phosphate rock [9,21]. According to statistical data, 75% of the world’s sources of phosphorites are of sedimentary origin and 20–25% are of magmatic origin [9,22,23].
Previous research has mainly focused on the possibility of producing gypsum materials to produce a specific PG component. However, the number of works devoted to the study of the relationship between the characteristics of PGs and the properties of the materials based on them is very limited. At the same time, it is believed that the genetic characteristics of PG (mineral and chemical composition, impurities, grain size, etc.) have a critical impact on the quality of gypsum materials and the efficiency of their production.
This study is aimed at comprehensively investigating the characteristics of PG from three different industrial enterprises to evaluate their relationship to the properties of the gypsum materials based on them.

2. Materials and Methods

The objects of study were the PGs, which were the by-products of the three following Russian enterprises:
1. CJSC PhosAgro AG–PGBal (Moscow, Russia): Here, the source of raw materials for the production of phosphoric acid is the Khibiny Mine of the alkaline rocks of the Kola Peninsula with sheet- and lens-shaped deposits of complex apatite ores associated with nepheline syenites.
2. Phosphogypsum EuroChem-Belorechenskiye Mineral Fertilizers LLC–PGBel (Zug, Switzerland): Here, the source of raw materials for the production of phosphoric acid is the apatite concentrate of the Kovdor Mine of ultra-basic alkaline rocks with carbonatites (igneous and metasomatic) of Lower Paleozoic age, as well as phosphorites of the Karatau phosphorite-bearing basin (Republic of Kazakhstan).
3. Phosphogypsum LLC “PG” Phosphorit”–PGKin (Kingisepp, Russia): Here, the source of raw materials for the production of phosphoric acid is the same as that of PGBel, but the proportion of raw materials, equipment used, and technology production are different. This may affect the characteristics of the PG and, as a consequence, the gypsum binders based on it.
For this research, the PG sample was used, which was obtained by mixing 20 kg of samples taken from 5 different points of each source.
The reference raw material was NG from the Shedok deposit (Russia).
The chemical and elemental compositions of the studied samples were determined by X-ray fluorescence analysis (XRF), and their mineral composition by X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD). Both methods were realized using an X-ray workstation WorkStation ARL 9900 (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), with co-anode radiation.
Differential thermal analysis (DTA-analysis) was carried out using a thermal analyzer STA 449 F1 JUPITER (Netzsch, Germany).
The study of the microstructure of the PGs and NG particles, as well as the morphology of new formations for synthesized gypsum binders, was carried out with scanning electron (SEM) microscopy using a Mira 3 FesSem scanning electron microscope (Tescan, Czech Republic), operating in high vacuum mode (InBeam) using a Schottky cathode high brightness. The samples were coated with chromium.
The specific surface area (SSA) and the pore size distribution of the PGs and NG particles and the gypsum binders based on them was measured using a multi-functional device PSH-12 (SP) (Khodakov Devices, Moscow, Russia) by Kozeny-Carman gas permeability method. The gas permeability of a powder layer is determined by the duration of air filtration through it at a fixed initial and final vacuum in the working volume of the device.
The Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) and Barrett-Joyner-Halenda (BJH) methods were realized with an automatic device BELSORP miniX (MicrotracBEL Corp., Osaka, Japan). The BET method is a method of mathematical description of physical adsorption, based on the theory of polymolecular (multilayer) adsorption. The BJH method is a method for calculating the pore size distribution in a porous material using adsorption or desorption isotherms. The method is based on the assumption that the pores are cylindrical in shape and that the pore radius is equal to the sum of the Kelvin radius and the thickness of the film adsorbed on the pore wall.
The particle size modulus of PGs was determined using standard methods according to the Russian Standard GOST 8736-2014.
The normal consistency, setting time, compressive, and flexural strength of gypsum binders were determined according to the Russian Standard GOST 23789-2018 and EN 13279-2:2004, NEQ “Gypsum binders. Test methods”.
The strength testing of the gypsum samples was carried out using a laboratory press with a load of 10 tons.
The synthesis of the PG binder was carried out using a laboratory oven with electronic temperature control. For the additional monitoring of air temperature and PG temperature in the oven, thermocouples connected to a Mastech MS6514 control and measuring device (Mastech Digital Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, USA) were used. The temperature of treatment for PG was 175 °C.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. PGs Characteristics

3.1.1. Chemical and Elemental Composition of PGs

The analysis of the chemical composition (Table 1) and the elemental composition (Table 2) of PGBal, PGBel, PGKin, and NG showed that the studied gypsum bearing components, regardless of origin, are represented by CaO and SO3 oxides, with the highest content of Ca and S elements, respectively. All PGs contain phosphorus oxide from 0.684 to 1.870%, the amount of which is determined by the chemical composition of the original phosphate rock. The main difference between PGs and NG is the presence, in addition to the main CaO and SO3 oxides (Table 1) and Ca and S elements, (Table 2), of a large number of additional components, which can subsequently affect the quality characteristics of the binders.

3.1.2. Mineral Composition of the PGs and NG

The XRD analysis of the studied PGs and NG demonstrated the presence of reflections responsible for the CaSO4 · 2H2O phase (d = 7.63, 4.28, 3.80, 3.07, 2.87, 2.69, 2.22, 2.08, 1.90 Å). The intensity of the peaks in the PG patterns varies slightly (Figure 1) among themselves, as well as in comparison with NG. However, it should be noted that PGKin has the lowest intensity of the main peak (d = 7.63).

3.1.3. DTA and TG-Analysis of the PGs and NG

According to DTA-analysis (Figure 2), basic phase transformations, such as the loss of adsorption water (at 100–120 °C); the loss of 0.5H2O (at 220–240 °C); and the inversion of CaSO4 (at 380–420 °C) are characteristic of NG.
In the case of PGs, the temperature ranges characteristic of the above phase transformations are differ. This is due to the presence of various impurities that can increase or decrease the temperature of phase transformations.
Phase transformations within approximately equal temperature intervals are typical for all PGs. In the DTA diagrams for all PGs and NG, there is a double endothermic effect. The first endothermic peak is associated with the removal of water crystallization during the dehydration of gypsum dihydrate; the second one is associated with the removal of the remaining moisture. However, it should be noted that in the case of PGBel (Figure 2), the removal of 1.5 of H2O molecule occurs at a temperature of 154.4 °C, which is 5.2 °C lower than for PGBal (159.6 °C); PGKin occupies an intermediate position. For NG, this phase transformation occurs at 152 °C. The formation of soluble anhydrite for PGs occurs in the temperature range of 168.5–175.6 °C, and at 170.3 °C for NG.
Also, the DTA diagrams of PGs have an exothermic peak in the temperature range of 435.5–436 °C, which indicates a restructuring of the crystal lattice with the formation of insoluble anhydrite. In NG, the insoluble anhydrite is formed at lower temperatures: 353.6 °C.
The TG analysis of PGs and NG demonstrated an equal temperature of loss of the adsorbed water. Thus, it can be assumed that replacing NG with PG will not affect the energy consumption of the gypsum binder production process.

3.1.4. Study of the Surface Morphology of PGs and NG Particles

The surface morphology of the PGs particles largely depends on the production technology, the granulometry of the phosphate rock, the concentration of phosphoric acid in the reactor slurry (higher reaction rate, and, as a result, higher ion mobility) and the component ratio.
According to the data in the work presented in [9], there are five morphological types of PG:
(1)
The rhombic type is characterized by needle-shaped crystals with a uniform distribution of thin needles and elongated plates with sizes from 10 to 120 μm and crystallite size, normally from 400 to 550 nm;
(2)
The aggregate small rhombic type is characterized by small agglomerated needles with a size of 5–30 μm and a crystallite size from 70 to 300 nm;
(3)
The cluster type can be characterized as polycrystalline aggregates arranged in a disorderly manner. The crystals tend to form clumps, which are sometimes referred to as “pink sand”;
(4)
The aggregate short-needle type is characterized by the presence of small grains, which, normally, have a round, stone-like shape. This type is significantly different from other ones;
(5)
The needle type consists of very thin needle-shaped crystals.
The morphology of PGs particles must be taken into account when using it as a raw material for the production of gypsum binders and the materials based on them. For the production of binders and drywall, the most suitable material is PG, which belongs to morphological types 1, 2, and 5. In turn, the types 3 and 4 are mainly used in the cement industry (as an analogue of NG), and in agriculture as well [9].
The analysis of the morphology of the studied PGs showed that PGBel (Figure 3a) is represented mainly by monoclinic needle-shaped crystals. For PGBal (Figure 3b), the agglomerates of needles in the sizes of 100–400 μm are observed compared to smaller needle crystals for PGBel. At the same time, for PGKin (Figure 3c) there are conglomerates, which are stone-shaped grains with a highly developed surface, in addition to needle-shaped crystals.
Thus, morphological analysis showed that PGBel belongs to the rhombic type; PGBal is of the small rhombic type; PGKin is a combination of aggregate and short-needle types.
Despite the identical deposits of phosphate rocks, PGBel and PGKin have a significant morphological difference, which is associated with differences in the composition of raw materials, technologies, and equipment used [9].
A comparison of the morphology of NG (Figure 4) showed the presence of a dense, highly developed particle surface (compared to PGs), which is caused by mechanical stress during splitting.

3.1.5. Study of the Grain Composition and Granulometry of PGs

Visually, the PGs are a bulk material, consisting of small particles and their large associations, formed through the agglomeration of particles during storage under high humidity. Normally, under minor external loads, the destruction of conglomerates occurs.
Figure 5 shows the PG conglomerates selected from the fraction larger than 5 mm. The conglomerates have the following differences in morphology: PGBel is characterized by a flaky shape (Figure 5a), PGBal is characterized by a rounded shape with a rounded smooth surface (Figure 5b), and PGKin has a porous structure and an angular grain shape (Figure 5c).
The color of PGs varies from white to gray (Figure 6). This depends on the amount and type of impurities in the feedstock, as well as the quality of washing and storage conditions.
To determine the fineness modulus, sieving of the PGs was carried out on standard sieves with a mesh size of 0.14; 0.315; 0.63; 1.25; 2.5; 5 mm. Before a sieving test, PGs were dispersed in a plastic container on rollers for 5 min; rubber balls acted as the grinding bodies, which made it possible to reduce the amount of conglomerates without grinding.
It should be noted that in PGKin, the number of large conglomerates practically did not change, which indicates their high hardness and solidity (Figure 6c).
The grain distribution and fineness modulus of the PGs are given in Table 3. According to the presented data, PGKin has the largest fineness modulus (2.72), the smallest one is for PGBel (1.28); the fineness modulusfor PGBal has an intermediate value (1.89).
SSA measured using the air permeability method for PGBel, PGBal, and PGKin was 203.6 m2/kg; 183.9 m2/kg; and 163.5 m2/kg, respectively.
According to the data from the BET and BJH methods, the maximum SSA is typical for PGBel, the minimum SSA is for PGBal, and the SSA value for PGKin occupies an intermediate position. The analysis of NG showed lower total pore volume values compared to the PGs (Table 4).
Figure 7 demonstrates the curves of the PGs, representing that the pore volume for a specific diameter are multimodal, and the curve of NG is unimodal. The curve of PGKin is characterized by four peaks, the two most intense peaks correspond to pore sizes of 3.76 nm (the predominant pore size, see Table 5) and 2.22 nm. The two less intense peaks correspond to particle sizes of 1.93 nm and 2.48 nm. This is most likely due to the fact that PGKin consists of particles belonging to two different morphological types (Figure 8).
The PGBel curve is characterized by three peaks: the most intense one corresponds to a pore size of 3.78 nm (Figure 7, Table 5) and two less intensive ones, corresponding to the pore sizes of 2.36 nm and 3.36 nm. PGBal is characterized by two peaks, corresponding to the pore sizes of 3.76 nm and 2.50 nm. For the curve of NG there is only one peak, corresponding to a pore size of 2.20 nm.
It is assumed that the granulometry of the gypsum-bearing components, as well as the developed surface and porosity of the particles, will influence the amount of mixing water required to ensure the standard consistency of the gypsum binder and, as a result, the strength of the gypsum paste.
At this stage of research, it can be assumed that PGKin, which is characterized by a smaller pore volume and a larger particle size, is likely to have a lower water requirement to provide a normal gypsum binder consistency compared to PGBel and PGBal.

3.2. Study of Binder Characteristics

3.2.1. Study of the Morphology of PG Binders and NG Binder

PG binders were synthesized by the thermal treatment of PGs in a laboratory oven at 175 °C. The NG binder was used as the first reference.
The analysis of the morphology of PG binders showed that thermal treatment does not affect the shape of the particles. However, their surface became more loose and developed due to the detachment of 1.5 of H2O molecules (Figure 8). It is difficult to judge the effect of thermal treatment on the morphology of particles of the NG binder due to the fact that they are formed by the destruction of the parent rock. At the same time, the surface of the particles of the NG binder has become looser and more developed, just like for PG binders.
Figure 8. Morphology of the binder based on: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin; (d)—NG.
Figure 8. Morphology of the binder based on: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin; (d)—NG.
Resources 13 00069 g008aResources 13 00069 g008b

3.2.2. SSA and Pore Size Distribution of the PG Binders and the NG Binder

The SSA, measured by the air permeability method for PGBel, PGBal, and PGKin binders, was 301.0 m2/kg, 241.8 m2/kg; and 192.3 m2/kg, respectively. Thus, the dehydration of PGs during heat treatment contributes to a slight increase in SSA.
The results of the BET and BJH methods demonstrated that the heat treatment of gypsum-bearing components leads to a decrease in SSA and total pore volume, an increase in the average pore diameter, and an increase in the predominant pore size of the binders (Table 5). At the same time, the most noticeable changes in the above parameters were observed for the PGKin binder.
Table 5. SSA and the pore size distribution of PG binders and the NG binder.
Table 5. SSA and the pore size distribution of PG binders and the NG binder.
ParameterGypsum-Bearing Component
PGBelPGBalPGKinNG
Air permeability method
SSA, m2/kg301.0241.8192.3457.0
BET method
SSA, m2/kg5374.93633.44019.14571.8
Total pore volume (p/p0 = 0.9900), cm3/g0.0400.0400.0400.038
Average pore diameter, nm29.6644.5340.0033.11
BJH method
SSA, m2/kg3732.42984.53506.14157.9
Total pore volume, cm3/g0.0560.0670.0680.055
Average pore diameter, nm44.0090.1777.9353.14
Thus, thermal treatment significantly affects the distribution of pores, which is confirmed by a change in the curves reflecting the pore volume distribution (Figure 9), as well as a shift of the peaks towards pores of a larger diameter.

3.2.3. Setting Times and Physical Characteristics of the PG Binders and the NG Binder

Setting times, compressive and flexural strength, and average density were determined for the gypsum samples with dimensions of 40 × 40 × 160 mm at the age of 2 h after molding, as well as after the complete drying of the samples. To prepare the gypsum samples, binders with a normal consistency (W/S ratio) were used (Table 6).
The analysis of the results in Table 6 showed that to achieve a normal consistency of gypsum binder, the largest amount of water is required for PGBel (W/S = 0.92); the least amount of water (W/S = 0.7) is required for the NG binder and the PGBKin binder, as well. The higher W/S ratio for the PGBel binder results in a longer initial setting time (17 min), compared to the PGKin binder (15 min). However, the PGBal binder with a high W/S ratio has the shortest initial setting time (11 min). This is most likely due to the different quality of PG washing and, in particular, the higher content of orthophosphoric acid residues in PGBal, which, according to the literature sources [24], accelerates the initial setting time for the gypsum binder. Interestingly, the studied PG binders are characterized by a faster initial setting time in relation to the NG binder. This is probably also due to the presence of impurities in the PGs that affect the rate of dissolution and precipitation of hydration products.
The average density and strength for the studied PG binders is significantly lower than NG binder both 2 h after molding and after the samples have completely dried. At the same time, the gypsum samples made from the PGBel binder have the minimum values of average density and strength, which is due to the high W/S ratio.
When testing these samples at 2 h after molding under a compressive load, moisture was observed on the surface. This suggests that the morphology of the PGBel binder and its high SSA initiate its high water demand, which is not used for hydration, but to ensure the normal consistency of gypsum binder. This phenomenon, in turn, negatively affects both the average density and the strength of the gypsum samples.
Despite the equal W/S ratios for the PGKin binder and NG binder, the PGKin binder has a lower average density and strength, which is likely due to the presence of impurities in the PG, which can affect not only the shape and size of crystals, but also the adhesion between crystals, and increase the total porosity of the gypsum samples which aligns with the data presented in [24].
To study the influence of the W/S ratio on the physical characteristics of the gypsum samples, the cubes with a size of 30 × 30 × 30 mm were molded at the following W/S ratios: 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9 (Table 7 and Table 8).
The analysis of the results (Table 7 and Table 8) showed that the average density and compressive strength of completely dry samples gradually decreased with the increasing W/S ratio. With an equal W/S ratio, the values of the average densities do not differ significantly (Table 7), and the values of compressive strength differ significantly depending on the W/S ratio (Table 8).
The compressive strength of the NG samples is higher than the compressive strength of the studied PG binders only at W/S = 0.8. At W/S ratios of 0.5, 0.6, and 0.7, the compressive strength of PGBel and PGKin is comparable, but lower than for PGBal. When the W/S is <0.7, the compressive strength is higher or comparable to the strength of the PG-based samples. At equal W/G ratios, the strength of samples synthesized from PGBel and PGKin binders is practically the same. The highest compressive strength at W/G 0.7, 0.6, 0.5 is typical for the PGBal binder. It was previously established that PGBal at high W/S ratios (Table 6) has a shorter period of initial setting time than other binders. This indicates an earlier structure formation, which at lower W/S ratios can provide higher strengths than other binders.
It is likely that by using various chemical and mechanical methods to reduce the W/S ratio in PG binders, their physical characteristics may be comparable to or higher than NG binders.

3.2.4. Morphology of New Formations in Gypsum Binders

The SEM analysis of the binders with W/S = 0.6 showed differences in their morphology and the density of new formations. The PGBal binder (Figure 10b) and NG binder (Figure 10d) are characterized by needle-shaped elongated crystals. New formations in PGBel and PGKin binders (Figure 10c) have a prismatic reinforced morphology. The differences in the morphology and size of new formations for the PG binders (Figure 10a–c) can be associated with different contents and types of impurities in PG, which, according to the work presented in [24], have a significant effect on the rate of dissolution and the precipitation of hydration products. In turn, the amount and type of impurities depend on the original phosphate rock, the production technology of orthophosphoric acid, the quality of washing, and the storage conditions of the PG.

4. Conclusions

A comprehensive study of PG from three different industrial enterprises and its comparison with NG allowed us to obtain the following conclusions:
-
all studied PGs can be used as an alternative resource of raw materials to NG when the gypsum binders are synthesized;
-
despite the use of the same raw materials for the production of PGBel and PGKin, differences in the technological characteristics significantly affect the physical characteristics of PGs and PG materials;
-
SSA and pore size distribution for the PG binders are the main factors ensuring a high water demand, and as a result, less satisfactory physical characteristics;
-
to increase the efficiency of PGs use as a raw material for the production of PG-based materials, it is necessary to design measures aimed at reducing its water demand, for example, the use of grinding processes and the introduction of superplasticizers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; methodology, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; validation, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; formal analysis, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; investigation, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; resources, K.L., N.A. and I.N.; data curation, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; Writing—Original draft preparation, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; Writing—Review and editing, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; supervision, K.L., N.A., N.K., I.N. and A.B.; project administration, K.L. and N.A.; funding acquisition, K.L., N.K. and I.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was realized under the support of the State Assignment for the creation of new laboratories in 2021, including under the guidance of young promising researchers of the national project “Science and Universities”. The research title is “Elaboration and development of scientific and technological foundations for creating an integrated technology for processing gypsum-containing waste from various industrial enterprises and searching of new ways to use processed products”, FZWG-2024-0001. Equipment from the High Technology Center at BSTU named after V. G. Shukhov was used.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

This work was realized under the administrative support of the world-class scientific and educational center “Innovative Solutions in the Agricultural Sector” (Belgorod).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Pedreño-Rojas, M.A.; Fořt, J.; Černý, R.; Rubio-de-Hita, P. Life cycle assessment of natural and recycled gypsum production in the Spanish context. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 120056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Balti, S.; Boudenne, A.; Hamdi, N. Characterization and optimization of eco-friendly gypsum materials using response surface methodology. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 69, 106219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Romero-Gómez, M.I.; Costa-Pereira, M.F.; Soares Dias, A.P.; Flores-Colen, I. Influence of high-temperature exposure on the properties of gypsum-plastic waste composites: Thermophysical and microstructural analysis. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 79, 107862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Garg, M.; Pundir, A. Energy efficient cement free binder developed from industry waste—A sustainable approach. Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. 2017, 21, 612–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jain, N.; Maiti, S.; Aakriti, M.J.; Sondhi, D. Development of sustainable water-resistant binder with FGD gypsum & fly ash, and its environmental impact evaluation via carbon footprint and energy consumption analysis. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 2024, 37, 101376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Alfimova, N.; Pirieva, S.; Levickaya, K.; Kozhukhova, N.; Elistratkin, M. The Production of Gypsum Materials with Recycled Citrogypsum Using Semi-Dry Pressing Technology. Recycling 2023, 8, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kamarou, M.; Korob, N.; Kwapinski, W.; Romanovski, V. High-quality gypsum binders based on synthetic calcium sulfate dihydrate produced from industrial waste. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2021, 100, 324–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Murali, G.; Azab, M. Recent research in utilization of phosphogypsum as building materials: Review. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 25, 960–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Bilal, E.; Bellefqih, H.; Bourgier, V.; Mazouz, H.; Dumitraş, D.-G.; Bard, F.; Laborde, M.; Caspar, J.P.; Guilhot, B.; Iatan, E.-L.; et al. Phosphogypsum circular economy considerations: A critical review from more than 65 storage sites worldwide. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 414, 137561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Alfimova, N.I.; Pirieva, S.Y.; Elistratkin, M.Y.; Kozhuhova, N.I.; Titenko, A.A. Production methods of binders containing gypsum-bearing wastes: A review. Bull. BSTU Named V.G. Shukhov 2020, 11, 8–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Qin, X.; Cao, Y.; Guan, H.; Hu, Q.; Liu, Z.; Xu, J.; Hu, B.; Zhang, Z.; Luo, R. Resource utilization and development of phosphogypsum-based materials in civil engineering. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 387, 135858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rashad, A.M. Phosphogypsum as a construction material. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 166, 732–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Geraldo, R.H.; Costa, A.R.D.; Kanai, J.; Silva, J.S.; Souza, J.D.; Andrade, H.M.C.; Gonçalves, J.P.; Fontanini, P.S.P.; Camarini, G. Calcination parameters on phosphogypsum waste recycling. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 256, 119406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Seraya, N.; Litvinov, V.; Daumova, G.; Zhusipov, N.; Idrisheva, Z.; Aubakirova, R. Production Waste Management: Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics and the Calculation of the Hazard Class of Phosphogypsum. Processes 2023, 11, 3033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, L.; Mo, K.H.; Tan, T.H.; Hung, C.-C.; Yap, S.P.; Ling, T.-C. Influence of calcination and GGBS addition in preparing β-hemihydrate synthetic gypsum from phosphogypsum. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2023, 19, e02259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Cao, W.; Yi, W.; Peng, J.; Li, J.; Yin, S. Recycling of phosphogypsum to prepare gypsum plaster: Effect of calcination temperature. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 45, 103511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Jin, Z.; Ma, B.; Su, Y.; Qi, H.; Lu, W.; Zhang, T. Preparation of eco-friendly lightweight gypsum: Use of beta-hemihydrate phosphogypsum and expanded polystyrene particles. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 297, 123837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ma, B.; Jin, Z.; Su, Y.; Lu, W.; Qi, H.; Hu, P. Utilization of hemihydrate phosphogypsum for the preparation of porous sound absorbing material. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 234, 117346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Garg, M.; Pundir, A.; Singh, R. Modifications in water resistance and engineering properties of β-calcium sulphate hemihydrate plaster-superplasticizer blends. Mater. Struct. 2016, 49, 3253–3263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Iglenkova, M.G.; Rodina, A.A.; Reshetov, V.A.; Romadenkina, S.B.; Kruzhalov, A.V. Dependences of Durability Phosphogypsum Knitting Materials from the Temperature of Heat Treatment and Particle Size Distribution. Proc. Saratov Univ. New Epis. Ser. Chem. Biol. Ecol. 2011, 11, 60–63. [Google Scholar]
  21. Loureiro, F.E.L.; de M. Monte, M.B.; Nascimento, M. Agrominerais—Fosfato. In Rochas & Minerais Industriais usos e Especificações. 2a; da Luz, A.B., Lins, F.A.F., Eds.; CETEM—Centro de Tecnologia Mineral: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2008; 974p. [Google Scholar]
  22. Pufahl, P.K.; Groat, L.A. Sedimentary and igneous phosphate deposits: Formation and exploration: An invited paper. Econ. Geol. 2017, 112, 483–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ptáček, P. Apatites and Their Synthetic Analogues—Synthesis. Structure. Properties and Applications; InTech: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Jia, R.; Wang, Q.; Luo, T. Reuse of phosphogypsum as hemihydrate gypsum: The negative effect and content control of H3PO4. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 174, 105830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. XRD-diagram of PGs and NG. –– NG (1); –– PGBel (2); –– PGBal (3); –– PGKin (4).
Figure 1. XRD-diagram of PGs and NG. –– NG (1); –– PGBel (2); –– PGBal (3); –– PGKin (4).
Resources 13 00069 g001
Figure 2. DTA-diagrams of PGs and NG. –– NG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Figure 2. DTA-diagrams of PGs and NG. –– NG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g002
Figure 3. Morphology of the PGs particles. (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Figure 3. Morphology of the PGs particles. (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g003
Figure 4. Morphology of the NG.
Figure 4. Morphology of the NG.
Resources 13 00069 g004
Figure 5. PG conglomerates with a size greater than 10 mm. (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Figure 5. PG conglomerates with a size greater than 10 mm. (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g005
Figure 6. Visual appearance of the PGs: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Figure 6. Visual appearance of the PGs: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g006
Figure 7. Pore size distribution of PGs and NG. –– NaG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Figure 7. Pore size distribution of PGs and NG. –– NaG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g007
Figure 9. Pore volume distribution for binders, based on: –– NG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Figure 9. Pore volume distribution for binders, based on: –– NG; –– PGBel; –– PGBal; –– PGKin.
Resources 13 00069 g009
Figure 10. Morphology of the binders based on: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGBal; (d)—NG.
Figure 10. Morphology of the binders based on: (a)—PGBel; (b)—PGBal; (c)—PGBal; (d)—NG.
Resources 13 00069 g010
Table 1. Content of oxides in the studied phosphogypsum and natural gypsum and the standard error (StdErr) of the device.
Table 1. Content of oxides in the studied phosphogypsum and natural gypsum and the standard error (StdErr) of the device.
PGBelPGBalPGKinNG
Oxide%StdErr%Oxide%StdErr%Oxide%StdErr
%
Oxide%StdErr
%
CaO47.840.250SO348.840.250CaO47.030.250SO349.830.250
SO347.180.250CaO46.440.250SO346.850.250CaO49.620.250
P2O51.870.070SrO2.5200.080P2O51.580.060MgO0.140.006
SiO21.180.050P2O50.680.034SiO21.270.060SrO0.120.006
F1.040.180CeO20.360.018SrO1.050.050Other0.30
SrO0.280.014PuO20.170.010F0.980.170
MgO0.150.010MgO0.150.008Al2O30.320.016
Al2O30.120.006SiO20.130.009CeO20.220.011
Other0.35Fe2O30.120.006MgO0.210.010
Na2O0.120.018Na2O0.100.019
La2O30.120.009Other0.40
Nd2O30.110.006
Other0.23
Table 2. Elemental composition of the studied phosphogypsum and natural gypsum and standard error (StdErr) of the device.
Table 2. Elemental composition of the studied phosphogypsum and natural gypsum and standard error (StdErr) of the device.
PGBelPGBalPGKinNG
Element%StdErr%Element%StdErr%Element%StdErr
%
Element%StdErr
%
Ca34.210.180Sx19.560.100CaO47.030.180SO349.830.100
Sx18.890.100Ca33.210.180SO346.850.100CaO49.620.180
Px0.820.030Sr2.1300.070P2O51.580.027MgO0.140.004
Si0.550.025Px0.300.015SiO21.270.026SrO0.120.005
F1.040.180Ce0.290.015SrO1.050.043Other0.22
Sr0.230.012Pu0.150.009F0.980.170
Mg0.090.006Mg0.090.005Al2O30.320.008
Al0.060.003Si0.060.004CeO20.220.009
Other0.29Fe0.090.004MgO0.200.006
Na0.090.014Na2O0.100.014
La0.100.007Other0.33
Nd0.010.005
Other0.17
Table 3. Grain distribution and fineness modulus of the PGs.
Table 3. Grain distribution and fineness modulus of the PGs.
PG IDSieve Residue TypeSieve Residue, by wt.%
Sieve Mesh Size, mm
Fineness Modulus
52.51.250.630.3150.16>0.16
PGBelPartial8.63.94.77.13.914.557.31.28
Total8.612.517.224.328.242.7100
PGBalPartial11.28.26.8107.818.937.11.89
Total11.219.426.236.24462.9100
PGKinPartial24.613.88.57.88.514.722.02.72
Total24.638.446.945.763.277.999.9
Table 4. SSA and the pore size distribution of PGS and NG.
Table 4. SSA and the pore size distribution of PGS and NG.
ParameterPGBelPGBalPGKinNG
Air permeability method
SSA, m2/kg203.6183.9163.5
BET method
SSA, m2/kg18,15515,77317,458
Total pore volume (p/p0 = 0.9900), cm3/g0.0710.0670.0610.053
Average pore diameter, nm15.6416.9813.9214.76
BJH method
SSA, m2/kg18,06515,71717172
Total pore volume, cm3/g0.0860.0840.0820.072
Average pore diameter, nm19.0321.4019.1719.29
Table 6. Physical characteristics of the experimental binders.
Table 6. Physical characteristics of the experimental binders.
Gypsum Component for BinderW/S
ratio
Setting Time,
min
Average Density, kg/m3Flexural Strength, MPaCompressive Strength, MPa
InitialFinalafter 2 h of Moldingafter Complete Dryingafter 2 h of Moldingafter Complete Dryingafter 2 h of Moldingafter Complete Drying
PGBel0.92172214619081,.852.471.724.67
PGBal0.88111914579351.902.552.235.29
PGKin0.701525149410561.913.353.388.14
NG0.701825157011203.115.744.7611.96
Table 7. Dependence of the average density of gypsum paste on the W/S ratio and binder type.
Table 7. Dependence of the average density of gypsum paste on the W/S ratio and binder type.
Gypsum Component for the BinderAverage Density for Completely Dry Binders at Different W/S Ratios, kg/m3
0.50.60.70.80.9
PGBel1332124611051014944
PGBal1342123311571053927
PGKin1321120210951062960
NG1384125511701054961
Table 8. Dependence of compressive strength of gypsum paste on W/S ratio and binder type.
Table 8. Dependence of compressive strength of gypsum paste on W/S ratio and binder type.
Gypsum Component for the BinderCompressive Strength for Completely Dry Binders at Different W/S Ratios, MPa
0.50.60.70.80.9
PGBel16.8913.9610.428.927.57
PGBal18.2415.4212.218.847.00
PGKin16.9413.5610.908.227.11
NG16.8613.9611.909.347.50
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Levickaya, K.; Alfimova, N.; Nikulin, I.; Kozhukhova, N.; Buryanov, A. The Use of Phosphogypsum as a Source of Raw Materials for Gypsum-Based Materials. Resources 2024, 13, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050069

AMA Style

Levickaya K, Alfimova N, Nikulin I, Kozhukhova N, Buryanov A. The Use of Phosphogypsum as a Source of Raw Materials for Gypsum-Based Materials. Resources. 2024; 13(5):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050069

Chicago/Turabian Style

Levickaya, Kseniya, Nataliya Alfimova, Ivan Nikulin, Natalia Kozhukhova, and Aleksander Buryanov. 2024. "The Use of Phosphogypsum as a Source of Raw Materials for Gypsum-Based Materials" Resources 13, no. 5: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050069

APA Style

Levickaya, K., Alfimova, N., Nikulin, I., Kozhukhova, N., & Buryanov, A. (2024). The Use of Phosphogypsum as a Source of Raw Materials for Gypsum-Based Materials. Resources, 13(5), 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050069

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop