Cenospheres Recovery from Fly Ash: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Subjects: Crystallography
Contributor:
Virendra Kumar Yadav

Coal fly ash (CFA) is a major global pollutant produced by thermal power plants during the generation of electricity. A significant amount of coal fly ash is dumped every year in the near vicinity of the thermal power plants, resulting in the spoilage of agricultural land. CFA has numerous value-added structural elements, such as cenospheres, plerospheres, ferrospheres, and carbon particles. Cenospheres are spherical-shaped solid-filled particles, formed during the combustion of coal in thermal power plants. They are lightweight, have high mechanical strength, and are rich in Al-Si particles. Due to cenospheres’ low weight and high mechanical strength, they are widely used as ceramic/nanoceramics material, fireproofing material, and in nanocomposites. 

  • coal fly ash
  • ceramics
  • cenospheres
  • alumino-silicate
  • ferrospheres

1. Introduction

Coal fly ash (CFA) is one of the major pollutants of the 20th and 21st centuries. It has drawn global attention regarding its safe management, optimized generation, and utilization [1]. Globally, a million tons of CFA are generated per year, in thermal power plants (TPPs), from the burning of pulverized coal, during the production of electricity [2]. The huge amount of generation of CFA leads to air, water, and soil pollution. Every year, a huge amount of CFA is dumped in the near vicinity of the TPPs, in fly ash ponds, which ultimately leads to water and land pollution. These fly ashes contain heavy metals, which can leach out once they contact water [3]. Besides heavy metals, CFA also contains minerals, such as magnetite, calcite, mullite [4], cristobalite, and silica [2]. These minerals contribute to the silica (40–60%), alumina (20–40%), and ferrous (5–15%) that rely on the source and types of coal used [2].

Since TPP furnaces are operated at very high temperatures (1000–1800 °C), the organic matter of coal becomes decomposed into a molten slag, which attains morphologically variable shape and size [5]. This variation leads to structurally different types of particles in CFA, namely, plerospheres, ferrospheres, and cenospheres (CS) [6]. The plerospheres are encapsulated particles that have numerous smaller particles within them, along with gases and minerals [7]. While, as the name suggests, ferrospheres are ferrous-rich spheres or “spherical particles” [8], and cenospheres are Al-Si rich spheres or “spherical particles” [2]. These Al-Si-rich particles are also known as aluminosilicate spheres or CFA microspheres [2]. As well as these spherical particles, there are varying amounts of irregular-shaped organic and inorganic carbon particles, i.e., unburned carbon soot and chars.
Among all the spherical particles, CS have been a focus in the field of ceramics, construction, lightweight materials, agriculture, etc., due to their unique physical and mechanical features. The word “cenospheres” is derived from the two Greek words—cenos, meaning “hollow”, and spahira, meaning “spheres” [9]. Due to the hollow nature of CS, their density is near 2.3 g/cm3, whereas the buoyancy of a CS is provided by its density. The bulk density of CS is around 400 kg/m3 [10][11], and the true density is ca. 2.3 g/cm3 [12]. Their high mechanical strength, high porosity, and thermal shock-resistance have encouraged scientists to use them in ceramics, the preparation of nanocomposites (decorating micron-sized CS with nanomaterials), and for environmental cleanup [13].

2. Morphological Properties of CFA Extracted Cenospheres

Based on the morphology, viscosity of liquid composition of slag, and elemental composition, some investigators have classified the CS into two broad types—namely, nonmagnetic CS and magnetic CS. The formation of magnetic CS depend upon the melts of A-Si and Fe-Al-Si [9]. High viscosity type cenospheric particles have more tendency to trap gases and increase in diameter of the particle, resulting in the thinner shell with the complete absence of pores [14].

Certain cenospheres have high Fe deposition on their surface that exhibit magnetic properties, while others are mainly rich in Al and Si (along with Na and Ca). In numerous pieces of literature, CS with small Fe deposition have been widely in the petroleum cracking, catalysis, ceramic, nanocomposites, and steel or iron-based industries [2].

Based on some physical parameters, i.e., texture, shell thickness, and shape, cenospheric particles are either transparent, grey, and dark type [15]. The former type of particle is thin-shelled, smooth-surfaced, grey type are translucent, porous, thick, and rough-surfaced [9]. While the dark-type CS have numerous perforations on their surface, their porosity is much greater than the grey CS. Dark CS scatters the light completely, which is passed through them and acts as an opaque particle. Ferrous-rich CS can be divided into two types: One having a porous shell, while the other with a spotty nonuniform surface, containing grey, black, brown, and white inclusions, along with dark black or brown spheres with a bright and smooth surface [16]. The Al content contributes a valuable role in the average size of a nonmagnetic CS, i.e., more Al equals higher mullite, and ultimately results in a decrease in the average diameter [9][17][18].

CS can be divided into two main groups, based on their magnetic features, which are acquired by the presence of Fe2O3/Fe3O4 minerals in the shell [19]. The shell of CS is a complex, layered structure (which is covered by a nano-size film externally), and internally [16][20] (which is 30–50 nm thick and contains Fe2O3). When the ferrous oxide percentage varies from 3 and 4 wt.% in the alumino-silicate glass, then two types of Fe3+ are present, i.e., single ions and nanoparticles with a diameter of 3 to 5 nm. These particles consist of a superparamagnetic phase with a spinel structure whose sublattices are diamagnetically diluted with Mg2+ and Al3+ ions. CS, having about 7 wt.% of Fe2O3 content, also involves a magnetic phase, based on defective magnetite [21].

Magnetic CS have heterogeneous regions of ferrospinels on their outer surface. An increase in the concentration of iron increases the crystallite size of the ferrospinel phase in the magnetic CS, and decreases the degree of iron substitution (Mg and Al) [9][17].

In general, CS size falls in the range of 20–300 microns, with a shell thickness of 1–18 microns, but the average size is 5–500 microns [22]. In comparison to the CFA particles, CS are much larger, and can vary from 5 to 500 µm [23].

3. Properties of Cenospheres Recovered from CFA

Structurally, cenospheres are hollow spherical-shaped particles that resemble glass beads, micron-balloons, or hollow ceramic micron-sized spheres [24]. Their size is 5–500 microns [25], and an average size is 30 µm to about 350 µm [26][23]. The cenospheric weight in a CFA comprises approximately 0.1–4.8% of the total weight of CFA [16], as shown in the literature.
There might be slight variation in the weight fractions from different parts of the world. As far as chemical compositions are concerned, CS contains elements, such as Ca, Mg, K, Na, Ti, Al, Mg, Si, Fe, C, and O [25], which may be present as different mineral phases [27]. Moreover, several investigators have also reported a trace of elements like V, Zr, Ba, Sr, S, P, and Rb. Strzałkowska and Adamczyk, 2019, reported all the above-mentioned elements in the CS recovered from three different TPPs (Dolna Odra, Opole, and Kazakhstan) [25]. Furthermore, Danish and Mosaberpanah, 2020, analyzed the chemical composition of CFA from 12 different TPPs, from various parts of the world, and found that all of them have Si, Al, and Fe as major elements, while Ti, Ca, Mg, Na, S, and Mg were present in smaller quantities [28]. The common elements were Al, Si, Fe, O, and Ca, whose composition may vary, but the presence of the other elements depend on the type of coal, source of coal, geographical origin, and furnace temperature during the burning of coal in the TPPs. When water or rain comes in contact with these toxic elements, it may leach out from there and may have a negative effect on the material [29][30].
Since CS have two surfaces, i.e., inner and outer, which are covered by a nano-thin film whose thickness is between 30–50 nm [21]. The inner surface is mainly composed of a glass of alumina and silica, and the skeleton is comprised of crystalline minerals like quartz, mullite, and magnetite [31]. Both of these surfaces make a shell composed of a crystalline phase and amorphous glass phase. The thickness of the crystalline phase is 2–30 microns, while for the amorphous glass phase, it is 50–90 microns [16]. The major crystalline phase is dominated by mullite, magnetite, calcite, cristobalite, feldspar, and hematite [32], which play a role in the morphology and elemental composition of CS. The average gas pressure inside a CS is below one atm within the range of 0.172–0.227 atm, which decreased in larger particles, since more gases would be required for expansion [33][34]. The stability of the hollow spheres is dependent on the equilibrium of surface tension forces on melt drops and intrinsic pressure of the internal hot gas [14]. The CS are bestowed with numerous physical properties like lightweight, low thermal conductivity (TC) [35], thermal shock-resistant [35], ultra-low density [22], highly porous [36][37], fire-proof [38], resistant to acid and bases [39], resistant to oxidation and corrosion [40], excellent mechanical strength [26], and protected from electromagnetic interferences [9][41][42][43][44]. The thermal shock-resistant properties in the CS are added from the mullite content [45], which is chemically inert. Furthermore, the porous nature of the CS enhances their water absorption capacity, thus it is considered a potential candidate as an absorbent for wastewater treatment and environmental cleanup [46].

4. Methods Used to Recovery Cenospheres from CFA

The recovery of CS from CFA is possible by both dry- and wet-based methods [47]. As the name suggests, the wet method involves a liquid media like water and or any organic solvent, whereas the dry-based method utilizes either air stream or size-based screening. Among all the techniques for recovery of CS from CFA most common methods are magnetic separation, sedimentation, flotation, or sink float method [12]. All these recovery methods are carried out in a separation tank which contains water (1 g/cc) and acetone (0.789 g/cc), which is fitted with agitation or stirring, and consequently, heavier particles settle down, while lighter particles float at the top. The dry-based method mainly uses air classifiers to separate CS particles [12][48].

5. Applications of Cenospheres in Ceramics and Environmental Cleanup

CS finds applications in all the fields which include building/construction materials [49], ceramics [50], plastics [19], construction [26], lightweight construction material [51], recreation [52], coating [22], automotive [19], paints and coatings [53], energy storage devices [54][55], polymer fillers [56], buoyancy and as low dielectric constant substrates [28]. They are best fitted for adding into silicone rubber to increase the conductivity. Besides this, it also increases rubbers’ suitability as an electromagnetic wave absorbing material [56][57], which can be used in electronic, as a broad band microwave absorber, and radar-based applications [58].

6. Conclusions

CFA is considered hazardous waste, due to the presence of numerous heavy metals. However, it has been categorized into useable materials in the last decade, due to their minerals and structurally important structures, such as cenospheres, plerospheres, and ferrospheres. Cenospheres possess unique and remarkable physical, chemical, and mechanical properties; thus, it has drawn the attention of the scientist from all parts of the world in ceramics, environmental cleanup, and lightweight materials. Cenospheres could be either magnetic or nonmagnetic, based on the Fe content. The cenospheres could be recovered from CFA by both dry and wet-based methods, but the wet-based method is preferred because of their economical nature [59]. The efficient recovery of cenospheres was least affected by the morphological properties of the cenospheres. To date, cenospheres are successfully used in the field of ceramics, wastewater treatment, agriculture, and electronics, and soon they will be considered a material of the future.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/cryst11091067

References

  1. Yadav, V.K.; Gnanamoorthy, G.; Cabral-Pinto, M.M.S.; Alam, J.; Ahamed, M.; Gupta, N.; Singh, B.; Choudhary, N.; Inwati, G.K.; Yadav, K.K. Variations and similarities in structural, chemical, and elemental properties on the ashes derived from the coal due to their combustion in open and controlled manner. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 32609–32625.
  2. Yadav, V.K.; Fulekar, M.H. Advances in Methods for Recovery of Ferrous, Alumina, and Silica Nanoparticles from Fly Ash Waste. Ceramics 2020, 3, 384–420.
  3. Naveen Kumar, B.; Radhika, R.; Kumar, V.V.; Chakradhar, B. Regulatory Requirements for Fly ash Utilisation from Thermal Power Plants in India. Int. J. Appl. Environ. Sci. 2020, 15, 151–166.
  4. Virendra, K.Y.; Pallavi, S.; Chagan, L.; Govindhan, G.; Nisha, C.; Bijendra, S.; Neha, T.; Haresh, K.; Pankaj, K. Synthesis and Characterization of Mullites From Silicoaluminous Fly Ash Waste. Int. J. Appl. Nanotechnol. Res. IJANR 2020, 5, 10–25.
  5. Dzikuć, M.; Kuryło, P.; Dudziak, R.; Szufa, S.; Dzikuć, M.; Godzisz, K. Selected Aspects of Combustion Optimization of Coal in Power Plants. Energies 2020, 13, 2208.
  6. Nisha, C.; Virendra Kumar, Y.; Parth, M.; Samreen Heena, K.; Gajendra Kumar, I.; Suriyaprabha, R.; Bijendra, S.; Yadav, A.K.; Raman Kumar, R. Recovery of Natural Nanostructured Minerals: Ferrospheres, Plerospheres, Cenospheres, and Carbonaceous Particles From Fly Ash. In Handbook of Research on Emerging Developments and Environmental Impacts of Ecological Chemistry; Gheorghe, D., Ashok, V., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2020; pp. 450–470.
  7. Goodarzi, F.; Sanei, H. Plerosphere and its role in reduction of emitted fine fly ash particles from pulverized coal-fired power plants. Fuel 2009, 88, 382–386.
  8. Strzałkowska, E. Morphology, chemical and mineralogical composition of magnetic fraction of coal fly ash. Int. J. Coal Geol. 2021, 240, 103746.
  9. Ranjbar, N.; Künzel, C. Cenospheres: A review. Fuel 2017, 207, 1–12.
  10. Chen, Z.; Li, J.; Yang, E.-H. Development of Ultra-Lightweight and High Strength Engineered Cementitious Composites. J. Compos. Sci. 2021, 5, 113.
  11. Li, Y. Ash Cenosphere Formation, Fragmentation and its Contribution to Particulate Matter Emission during Solid Fuels Combustion. Ph.D. Thesis, Curtin University, Curtin, Australia, 2012.
  12. Wrona, J.; Żukowski, W.; Bradło, D.; Czupryński, P. Recovery of Cenospheres and Fine Fraction from Coal Fly Ash by a Novel Dry Separation Method. Energies 2020, 13, 3576.
  13. Ge, J.C.; Yoon, S.K.; Choi, N.J. Application of Fly Ash as an Adsorbent for Removal of Air and Water Pollutants. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1116.
  14. Kleinhans, U.; Wieland, C.; Frandsen, F.J.; Spliethoff, H. Ash formation and deposition in coal and biomass fired combustion systems: Progress and challenges in the field of ash particle sticking and rebound behavior. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2018, 68, 65–168.
  15. Yoriya, S.; Tepsri, P. Separation Process and Microstructure-Chemical Composition Relationship of Cenospheres from Lignite Fly Ash Produced from Coal-Fired Power Plant in Thailand. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5512.
  16. Fomenko, E.; Anshits, N.; Solovyov, L.; Mikhaylova, O.; Anshits, A. Composition and Morphology of Fly Ash Cenospheres Produced from the Combustion of Kuznetsk Coal. Energy Fuels 2013, 27, 5440–5448.
  17. Fomenko, E.; Anshits, N.; Solov’ev, L.; Mikhailova, O.; Anshits, A. Composition and structure of the shells of fly ash cenospheres from the combustion of coal of the Kuznetsk Basin. Solid Fuel Chem. 2014, 48, 129–139.
  18. Fomenko, E.V.; Rogovenko, E.S.; Solovyov, L.A.; Anshits, A.G. Gas permeation properties of hollow glass-crystalline microspheres. RSC Adv. 2014, 4, 9997–10000.
  19. Nakonieczny, D.; Antonowicz, M.; Paszenda, Z. Cenospheres and their application advantages in biomedical engineering—A systematic review. Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. 2020, 59, 115–130.
  20. Drozhzhin, V.S.; Shpirt, M.Y.; Danilin, L.D.; Kuvaev, M.D.; Pikulin, I.V.; Potemkin, G.A.; Redyushev, S.A. Formation processes and main properties of hollow aluminosilicate microspheres in fly ash from thermal power stations. Solid Fuel Chem. 2008, 42, 107–119.
  21. Anshits, N.; Vereshchagina, T.; Fomenko, E.; Kruchek, D.M.; Bayukov, O.; Kyrenskii, L.V.; Zykova, I.; Paretskov, E.N.; Anshits, A.G. Coal fly ash cenospheres and their application for immobilization of liquid radioactive waste. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management, ICEM’05, Glasgow, Scotland, 3–8 September 2005; American Society of Mechanical Engineers: New York, NY, USA, 2005; Volume 2005, pp. 1124–1131.
  22. Adesina, A. Sustainable application of cenospheres in cementitious materials—Overview of performance. Dev. Built Environ. 2020, 4, 100029.
  23. Yoriya, S.; Intana, T.; Tepsri, P. Separation of Cenospheres from Lignite Fly Ash Using Acetone–Water Mixture. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3792.
  24. Jiang, T.; Gao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Yu, J.; Yang, K.; Zhao, Y.; Li, W.; Wu, X. Development and Mechanical Characterization of HGMS–EHS-Reinforced Hollow Glass Bead Composites. ACS Omega 2020, 5, 6725–6737.
  25. Strzałkowska, E.; Adamczyk, Z. Influence of chemical composition of fly-ash cenospheres on their grains size. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 17, 809–818.
  26. Ngu, L.-N.; Wu, H.; Zhang, D.-K. Characterization of Ash Cenospheres in Fly Ash from Australian Power Stations. Energy Fuels 2007, 21, 3437–3445.
  27. Shao, Y.; Jia, D.; Liu, B. Characterization of porous silicon nitride ceramics by pressureless sintering using fly ash cenosphere as a pore-forming agent. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2009, 29, 1529–1534.
  28. Danish, A.; Mosaberpanah, M.A. Formation mechanism and applications of cenospheres: A review. J. Mater. Sci. 2020, 55, 4539–4557.
  29. Leelarungroj, K.; Likitlersuang, S.; Chompoorat, T.; Janjaroen, D. Leaching mechanisms of heavy metals from fly ash stabilised soils. Waste Manag. Res. 2018, 36, 616–623.
  30. Sandeep, P.; Sahu, S.K.; Kothai, P.; Pandit, G.G. Leaching Behavior of Selected Trace and Toxic Metals in Coal Fly Ash Samples Collected from Two Thermal Power Plants, India. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2016, 97, 425–431.
  31. Żyrkowski, M.; Neto, R.C.; Santos, L.F.; Witkowski, K. Characterization of fly-ash cenospheres from coal-fired power plant unit. Fuel 2016, 174, 49–53.
  32. Vassilev, S.V.; Menendez, R.; Diaz-Somoano, M.; Martinez-Tarazona, M.R. Phase-mineral and chemical composition of coal fly ashes as a basis for their multicomponent utilization. 2. Characterization of ceramic cenosphere and salt concentrates. Fuel 2004, 83, 585–603.
  33. Li, Y.; Gao, X.; Wu, H. Further Investigation into the Formation Mechanism of Ash Cenospheres from an Australian Coal-Fired Power Station. Energy Fuels 2013, 27, 811–815.
  34. Jiang, L.; Elbaz, A.M.; Guida, P.; Al-Noman, S.M.; AlGhamdi, I.A.; Saxena, S.; Roberts, W.L. Cenosphere Formation during Single-Droplet Combustion of Heavy Fuel Oil. Energy Fuels 2019, 33, 1570–1581.
  35. Urunkar, Y.; Pandit, A.; Bhargava, P.; Joshi, J.; Mathpati, C.; Vasanthakumaran, S.; Jain, D.; Hussain, Z.; Patel, S.; More, V. Light-weight thermal insulating fly ash cenosphere ceramics. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2018, 15, 1467–1477.
  36. Qian, H.; Cheng, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, R.; Wang, Y. Preparation of Porous Mullite Ceramics Using Fly Ash Cenosphere as a Pore-Forming Agent by Gelcasting Process. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2014, 11, 858–863.
  37. Haustein, E.; Kuryłowicz-Cudowska, A. The Effect of Fly Ash Microspheres on the Pore Structure of Concrete. Minerals 2020, 10, 58.
  38. Biju-Duval, P. A New Porous Material Based on Cenospheres. Master’s Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2007.
  39. Patel, S.K.; Majhi, R.K.; Satpathy, H.P.; Nayak, A.N. Durability and microstructural properties of lightweight concrete manufactured with fly ash cenosphere and sintered fly ash aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 226, 579–590.
  40. Chávez-Valdez, A.; Vargas-Gutiérrez, G.; Almanza-Robles, J.M.; Arizmendi-Morquecho, A. Fly Ash Cenospheres Coatings by EPD-Microwave Sintering Process for SiC Corrosion Resistance. Key Eng. Mater. 2009, 412, 201–206.
  41. Kumar, P.; Maiti, U.; Sikdar, A.; Das, T.; Kumar, A.; Sudarsan, V. Recent Advances in Polymer and Polymer Composites for Electromagnetic Interference Shielding: Review and Future Prospects. Polym. Rev. 2019, 59, 687–738.
  42. Singh, A.K.; Shishkin, A.; Koppel, T.; Gupta, N. A review of porous lightweight composite materials for electromagnetic interference shielding. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 149, 188–197.
  43. Bora, P.J.; Mallik, N.; Ramamurthy, P.C.; Kishore; Madras, G. Poly(vinyl butyral) -polyaniline-magnetically functionalized fly ash cenosphere composite film for electromagnetic interference shielding. Compos. Part B Eng. 2016, 106, 224–233.
  44. Manocha, L.M.; Ram, K.A.; Manocha, S.M. Separation of Cenospheres from Fly Ashes by Floatation Method. Eurasian ChemTech J. 2011, 13, 89–95.
  45. Chávez-Valdez, A.; Arizmendi-Morquecho, A.; Vargas, G.; Almanza, J.M.; Alvarez-Quintana, J. Ultra-low thermal conductivity thermal barrier coatings from recycled fly-ash cenospheres. Acta Mater. 2011, 59, 2556–2562.
  46. Tiwari, M.; Shukla, S.P.; Mohan, D.; Bhargava, D.S.; Kisku, G.C. Modified Cenospheres as an Adsorbent for the Removal of Disperse Dyes. Adv. Environ. Chem. 2015, 2015, 349254.
  47. Hirajima, T.; Petrus, H.T.B.M.; Oosako, Y.; Nonaka, M.; Sasaki, K.; Ando, T. Recovery of cenospheres from coal fly ash using a dry separation process: Separation estimation and potential application. Int. J. Miner. Process. 2010, 95, 18–24.
  48. Beddu, S.; Zainoodin, M.; Basri, A.; Itam, Z.; Ahmadi, R.; Abd Manan, T.S. The potential of cenospheres production from Malaysian coal power plants. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1101, 012012.
  49. Satpathy, H.P.; Patel, S.K.; Nayak, A.N. Development of sustainable lightweight concrete using fly ash cenosphere and sintered fly ash aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 202, 636–655.
  50. Nithyanandam, A.; Deivarajan, T. Development of fly ash cenosphere-based composite for thermal insulation application. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2021, 18, 1825–1831.
  51. Agrawal, U.S.; Wanjari, S.P. Physiochemical and engineering characteristics of cenosphere and its application as a lightweight construction material—A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2017, 4, 9797–9802.
  52. Kolay, P.K.; Singh, D.N. Physical, chemical, mineralogical, and thermal properties of cenospheres from an ash lagoon. Cem. Concr. Res. 2001, 31, 539–542.
  53. Arizmendi-Morquecho, A.; Chávez-Valdez, A.; Alvarez-Quintana, J. High temperature thermal barrier coatings from recycled fly ash cenospheres. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2012, 48, 117–121.
  54. Brooks, A.L.; Fang, Y.; Shen, Z.; Wang, J.; Zhou, H. Enabling high-strength cement-based materials for thermal energy storage via fly-ash cenosphere encapsulated phase change materials. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2021, 120, 104033.
  55. Rewatkar, M.R.; Shende, D.Z. Experimental investigation on cenosphere-based paper battery and electrochemical battery. Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util. Environ. Eff. 2020, 42, 2018–2033.
  56. Irtiseva, K.; Lapkovskis, V.; Mironovs, V.; Ozolins, J.; Thakur, V.K.; Goel, G.; Baronins, J.; Shishkin, A. Towards Next-Generation Sustainable Composites Made of Recycled Rubber, Cenospheres, and Biobinder. Polymers 2021, 13, 574.
  57. Kushnoore, S.; Kamitkar, N.; Atgur, V.; Uppin, M.S.; Satishkumar, M. A Review on Utilization of Light Weight Fly Ash Cenosphere as Filler in both Polymer and Alloy-Based Composites. J. Mech. Eng. Res. 2020, 3, 17–23.
  58. Bora, P.J.; Porwal, M.; Vinoy, K.J.; Kishore; Ramamurthy, P.C.; Madras, G. Industrial waste fly ash cenosphere composites based broad band microwave absorber. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 134, 151–163.
  59. Kiani, A.; Zhou, J.; Galvin, K. Multistage Concentration of Cenospheres in Fly Ash Using the Inverted Refux Classifier. Coal Combust. Gasif. Prod. 2015, 7, 40–46.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback