Testing the Supplementary Cementitious Material Based on GGBFS and Zeolite for Prediction of the Activity Index †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Experiment
2.1. Materials
- Cement CEM I 42.5 N in accordance with EN 197-1.
- Silica sand of 0/2 fraction (standardized gradation) in accordance with EN 196-1.
- Zeoslag: 6 different samples (A–F), having the GGBFS/Z ratio 90/10, were taken into the experiment. They differ in production and milling process. This has an impact on the chemical composition, as it is given in Table 1.
- Zeolite: natural zeolite, chemical composition is given in Table 1.
2.2. Methods
- Chemical composition was determined using XRF analysis. The main oxides (MgO, Al2O3, SiO2, CaO and Fe2O3) are given in Table 1. and they were used for calculation of modulus,
- determining the amount of water for standard consistency of binder paste (STN EN 196-3: Methods of testing cement. Part 3: Determination of setting times and soundness),
- initial setting time IST (STN EN 196-3: Methods of testing cement. Part 3: Determination of setting times and soundness),
- compressive strength (fc) 2, 7 and 28 days of setting and hardening (STN EN 196-1: Methods of testing cement. Part 1: Determination of strength),
- activity index (AI) after 2, 7 and 28 days of setting and hardening (STN EN 15167-1 Ground granulated blast furnace slag for use in concrete, mortar and grout. Part 1: Definitions, specifications and conformity criteria).
3. Results and Discussion
Dependences for Prediction of Activity Indexes
4. Conclusions
- the moderate dependence between modulus of basicity and indexes of activities was found, so the prediction of activity index AI28 based on modulus of basicity is possible but questionable,
- the moderate dependence between modulus of hydraulicity and indexes of activities was found too, so the prediction of activity index AI28 based on modulus of hydraulicity is also possible,
- he moderate strength dependence between initial setting time and indexes of activities was found, the prediction of the activity index AI28 based on initial setting time could be determined however more testing should be performed I order to confirm or determine stronger dependence. This also applies to activity index prediction based on modulus of basicity and modulus of hydraulicity.
Acknowledgments
References
- Markiv, T.; Sobol, K.; Franus, M.; Franus, W. Mechanical and durability properties of concretes incorporating natural zeolite. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2016, 16, 554–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, N.Q.; Li, G.Z.; Zang, X.W. High-strength and flowing concrete with a zeolitic mineral admixture. Cem. Concr. Aggreg. 1990, 12, 61–69. [Google Scholar]
- Ramezanianpour, A.A.; Mousavi, R.; Kalhori, M.; Sobhani, J.; Najimi, M. Micro and macro level properties of natural zeolite contained concretes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 101, 347–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quanlin, N.; Naiqian, F. Effect of modified zeolite on the expansion of alkaline silica reaction. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35, 1784–1788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghafari, E.; Feys, D.; Khayat, K. Feasibility of using natural SCMs in concrete for infrastructure applications. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 127, 724–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Özbay, E.; Erdemir, M.; Durmuş, H.İ. Utilization and efficiency of ground granulated blast furnace slag on concrete properties—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 105, 423–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johari, M.M.; Brooks, J.J.; Kabir, S.; Rivard, P. Influence of supplementary cementitious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 2639–2648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shariq, M.; Prasad, J.; Masood, A. Effect of GGBFS on time dependent compressive strength of concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 1469–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Material | MgO [%] | Al2O3 [%] | SiO2 [%] | CaO [%] | Fe2O3 [%] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEM I 42.5 N | 9.0 | 3.0 | 20.3 | 64.1 | 3.0 |
Zeoslag A | 9.0 | 7.1 | 47.3 | 32.3 | 0.4 |
Zeoslag B | 9.7 | 7.5 | 48.2 | 31.3 | 0.4 |
Zeoslag C | 6.1 | 4.9 | 29.1 | 15.9 | 0.2 |
Zeoslag D | 4.0 | 2.9 | 16.7 | 7.1 | 0.1 |
Zeoslag E | 8.4 | 7.4 | 48.5 | 31.4 | 0.4 |
Zeoslag F | 7.4 | 6.8 | 43.4 | 23.1 | 0.4 |
Zeolite | 1.2 | 11.6 | 78.8 | 3.5 | 1.7 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kovac, M.; Sicakova, A.; Spak, M. Testing the Supplementary Cementitious Material Based on GGBFS and Zeolite for Prediction of the Activity Index. Proceedings 2018, 2, 1287. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2201287
Kovac M, Sicakova A, Spak M. Testing the Supplementary Cementitious Material Based on GGBFS and Zeolite for Prediction of the Activity Index. Proceedings. 2018; 2(20):1287. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2201287
Chicago/Turabian StyleKovac, Marek, Alena Sicakova, and Matej Spak. 2018. "Testing the Supplementary Cementitious Material Based on GGBFS and Zeolite for Prediction of the Activity Index" Proceedings 2, no. 20: 1287. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2201287
APA StyleKovac, M., Sicakova, A., & Spak, M. (2018). Testing the Supplementary Cementitious Material Based on GGBFS and Zeolite for Prediction of the Activity Index. Proceedings, 2(20), 1287. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2201287