Specifications Table {#sec0001}
====================

SubjectCivil engineeringSpecific subject areaBuilding Materials, Concrete Technology, Mechanical and Durability PropertiesType of dataTables, Figures and Images.How data were acquiredLaboratory ExperimentsData formatRaw and AnalysedParameters for data collectionThree different percentages of GGBS and CKD combinations are replaced the cement in a high levels (as well as the reference mixture without replacement) to produce sustainable mortar.Description of data collectionData was obtained from laboratory experiments at the ages of 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 56, 90 and 550 days of compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity properties of the hardened mortarData source locationLiverpool, United KingdomData accessibilityThe data are available within this articleRelated research articleShubbar, Ali Abdulhussein, Hassnen Jafer, Muhammad Abdulredha, Zainab S. Al-Khafaji, Mohammed Salah Nasr, Zainab Al Masoodi, and Monower Sadique. \"Properties of cement mortar incorporated high volume fraction of GGBFS and CKD from 1 day to 550 days.\" Journal of Building Engineering (2020): 101327. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101327>

Value of the Data {#sec0002}
=================

•This data composed of alternative cement materials in the concrete industry for building construction.•The information provided by this data are useful to find a significant solution to environmental problems through the re-use of industrial waste in new other applications as well as reducing the CO~2~ emissions that result from the cement industry.•The data in this article is beneficial in producing sustainable mortar in which cement content is significantly reduced.•This data helps others to understand the behaviour of hardened mortar containing high levels of GGBS and CKD during early and later ages.

1. Data Description {#sec0003}
===================

The dataset provided here represented the information for examining the compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) properties of the hardened mortar containing different combinations of Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS) and cement Kiln Dust (CKD) (in a high volume fraction) as alternatives of cement. Four mixtures were implemented, Control (reference mix without replacement) and three other mixtures included replacing the cement (by weight) with GGBFS and CKD combinations which designated as follows: T40 (26.7% GGBFS +13.3% CKD), T60 (40% GGBFS + 20% CKD), T80 (53.3% GGBFS + 26.7% CKD). The details of these mixtures can be found in [@bib0001]. The compressive strength and UPV tests were examined at 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 56, 90 and 550 days of curing. The test results for Control, T40, T60 and T80 mixtures respectively are shown in [Tables 1](#tbl0001){ref-type="table"}, [2](#tbl0002){ref-type="table"}, [3](#tbl0003){ref-type="table"} and [4](#tbl0004){ref-type="table"} (as well as in [Figs. 1](#fig0001){ref-type="fig"}, [2](#fig0002){ref-type="fig"}, [Fig. 3](#fig0003){ref-type="fig"}, [Fig. 4](#fig0004){ref-type="fig"}) for compressive strength and in [Tables 5](#tbl0005){ref-type="table"}, [6](#tbl0006){ref-type="table"}, [7](#tbl0007){ref-type="table"} and [8](#tbl0008){ref-type="table"} (as well as in [Figs. 5](#fig0005){ref-type="fig"}, [6](#fig0006){ref-type="fig"}, [Fig. 7](#fig0007){ref-type="fig"}, [Fig. 8](#fig0008){ref-type="fig"}) for UPV. More detailed information about the compressive strength and UPV data can be found in the supplementary Excel datasets and in Ref. [@bib0001].Table 1Results of the compressive strength (MPa) for the Control mixture.Table 1**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**8.7517.123.3430.6735.8435.8140.1438.8240.744.24**Sample 2**8.4116.923.2534.5235.7237.4137.4739.6340.844.31**Sample 3**7.9717.222.0334.0336.1136.9234.553940.944.16**Sample 4**8.4717.324.9733.235.9137.4237.4239.2240.444.26**Average8.4017.1323.4033.1135.9036.8937.4039.1740.7044.24**Table 2Results of the compressive strength (MPa) for T40 mixture.Table 2**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**10.5110.2210.9123.2129.3332.2739.1139.2339.1245.21**Sample 2**9.3711.4011.6522.8928.6433.1037.0738.2440.1444.12**Sample 3**9.619.9610.3922.7327.6031.6439.0638.1741.3043.60**Sample 4**9.479.3610.4723.0426.9831.4437.3038.3040.1343.78**Average9.7410.2410.8622.9728.1432.1138.1438.4940.1744.18**Table 3Results of the compressive strength (MPa) for T60 mixture.Table 3**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**4.676.849.5823.1823.8829.8836.9436.840.6243.41**Sample 2**3.957.818.9322.6424.8728.9635.9737.6239.7543.52**Sample 3**4.747.49.7422.3424.7629.5537.7737.4739.6241.34**Sample 4**4.947.2910.1122.2225.1230.0236.7538.7240.3341.42**Average4.587.349.5922.6024.6629.6036.8637.6540.0842.42**Table 4Results of the compressive strength (MPa) for T80 mixture.Table 4**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**3.216.808.9422.1123.4025.1126.1433.1733.2934.42**Sample 2**3.226.419.4021.8022.1424.6627.1133.2833.1733.12**Sample 3**3.087.408.9421.6221.8826.1025.1832.9833.3033.40**Sample 4**3.086.709.4021.4422.1124.1226.1233.1933.3333.16**Average3.156.839.1721.7422.3825.0026.1433.1633.2733.53**Fig. 1Average compressive strength of the Control mixture.Fig. 1Fig. 2Average compressive strength of T40 mixture.Fig. 2Fig. 3Average compressive strength of T60 mixture.Fig. 3Fig. 4Average compressive strength of T80 mixture.Fig. 4Table 5Results of the UPV (m/s) for the Control mixture.Table 5**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**3175389140324201420242924310435644534478**Sample 2**3181392240824190423842984304437444784490**Sample 3**3195391240554182423743104292435844524480**Sample 4**3187391040514178427442924310437644564502**Average3185390940554188423842984304436644604488**Table 6Results of the UPV (m/s) for T40 mixture.Table 6**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**2718355137573974410441224167421642294299**Sample 2**2735354337753997411041284174422642324317**Sample 3**2738354737714022411541724172421442244311**Sample 4**2750354837813995411041404190421142294317**Average2735354737713997411041414176421642284311**Table 7Results of the UPV (m/s) for T60 mixture.Table 7**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**2641350937213984408740824149419141974282**Sample 2**2688349737214000408241044162419641994292**Sample 3**2666350237333992409841494149418842014292**Sample 4**2668350337143992408240824184418242024254**Average2666350337223992408741044161418942004280**Table 8Results of the UPV (m/s) for T80 mixture.Table 8**1 day2 days3 days7 days14 days21 days28 days56 days90 days550 daysSample 1**2579323435403934394540244051407240844118**Sample 2**2593322135643899396940344053407340784130**Sample 3**2581322135603924399140394028407440844152**Sample 4**2566322035613912397440424082407440794134**Average2580322435563917397040354054407340814133**Fig. 5Average UPV of the Control mixture.Fig. 5Fig. 6Average UPV of T40 mixture.Fig. 6Fig. 7Average UPV of T60 mixture.Fig. 7Fig. 8Average UPV of T80 mixture.Fig. 8

2. Experimental Design, Materials, and Methods {#sec0004}
==============================================

The main aim of using GGBFS and CKD as cement replacement materials is to reduce the environmental burden of cement manufacturing. For example, the cement industry consumes high energy as well as emits a high amount of CO~2~ into the atmosphere [@bib0002], [@bib0003], [@bib0004], [@bib0005], [@bib0006], [@bib0007]. The cement industry contributes about 7% of CO~2~ production worldwide [@bib0008], [@bib0009], [@bib0010], [@bib0011], [@bib0012], [@bib0013]. The laboratory work was conducted through the utilisation of different combinations of these materials in the production of mortar i.e no course aggregate was used in all mixtures. For all mixtures, the water to binder (W/B) ratio and sand to binder (S/B) ratio was fixed as 0.4 and 2.5, respectively. The GGBFS/CKD ratio in all the investigated mixtures was 2. The mortars were cast in 100 × 100 × 100 mm cubes for UPV measurements according to BS 1881-203 [@bib0014] while the prism moulds with the dimensions of 40 × 40 × 160 mm were used for compressive strength measurements according to BS EN 196-1 [@bib0015]. More data (images) about the method of mixing, preparation of samples, curing, state of samples before testing and experimental setups of the UPV and compressive strength tests are illustrated in [Figs. 9](#fig0009){ref-type="fig"} to [11](#fig0011){ref-type="fig"}.Fig. 9Raw materials and mixing of components for the preparation of samples.Fig. 9Fig. 10Cubes and prism samples in the moulds and curing in water after demoulding.Fig. 10Fig. 11State of samples before testing and experimental setups of the UPV and compressive strength tests.Fig. 11

Declaration of Competing Interest
=================================

None.

Appendix A. Supplementary materials {#sec0018a}
===================================

Supplementary Data S1Supplementary Raw Research Data. This is open data under the CC BY license <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>Supplementary Data S1

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided for this research by Al- Mustaqbal University College, Babylon, Iraq. Additionally, the laboratory support for this research provided by Liverpool John Moors University, UK is gratefully acknowledged.

Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:[10.1016/j.dib.2020.105961](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105961){#intrrf0003}.
