Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 42, Issue 24, pp 10188–10195 | Cite as

Development and characterization of nanostructured-perlite-cementitious surface compounds

  • M. S. Morsy
  • H. A. Aglan
Article

Abstract

The effect of perlite loading on the thermal resistivity, solar reflectance and indirect tensile strength of Nanostructured Cementitious Binder is studied. The main objective of this research is to constitute structural lightweight surface compounds and to improve their thermal resistivity and reflectivity with suitable mechanical performances as a surface compound. Portland White Cement (PWC) was partially substituted by nano clay. An optimum blend of type I PWC, and nano clay was determined based on indirect tensile strength. The perlite dosage was added to the optimum cement-nano clay blend at different ratios (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70%) by weight. Superplasticizer with different ratios was used to study the performance of the 70% perlite mixture. The mixes were prepared using water of consistence. The wet compounds were molded in PVC molds and left for 24 h, then demolded and cured in humid air (20 ± 1 °C & 100% RH) for 28 days. The molds are 50 mm in diameter and 27 mm height. The thermal resistivity and indirect tensile strength of the different compounds were evaluated for the cured samples at 7 and 28 days. It was found that the 2% nano clay improved the indirect tensile strength of the neat PWC. As expected the addition of the perlite has reduced the indirect tensile strength but increased the thermal resistivity of the compound by 250%. The increase of perlite loading has not affected the solar reflectivity of the compound. Sokalan HP 80 polycarboxylate ether superplasticizer was successfully used to recover about 50% of the loss in the indirect tensile strength of the newly formulated Nanostructure Perlite Cementious Surface Compounds (NPCSC) containing 70% perlite loading.

Keywords

Thermal Resistivity Silica Fume Calcium Hydroxide Cement Paste Calcium Silicate Hydrate 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Partial support for this project came from USDA/CSREES. The BASF Chemical Company, Lehigh Cement Company and Airlite Processing Corporation of Florida are acknowledged for providing materials used in this study. Laz Allie, Al Allie, Maria Calhoun, Adam Charlton and Mike Ransdell for assisting with sample preparation and testing.

References

  1. 1.
    Demirboga R (2003) Energy Build 35:189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fu X, Chung DDL (1997) Cem Concr Res 27:1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Morsy MS (1999) Cem Concr Res 30:603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heikal M, Morsy MS, Radwan MM (2005) Cem Concr Res 35:1438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Morsy MS, Heikal M (2004) Ceramics-Silicaty 48(3):110Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    London AG (1979) Int J Lightweight Concr 1:71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen P, Chung DDL (1995) Cem Concr Res 25:465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fu X, Chung DDL (1999) ACI Mater J 96(4):455Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morsy MS, Osman TA, Abo-El-Enein SA (2006) Characteristics of blended cement pates containing metakaolin exposed to elevated temperature. In: 21st international conference on solid waste technology and management, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 26–29 March 2006Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morsy MS (2006) Silicates Ind 71(5–6):75Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heikal M, Morsy MS, Aiad I (2005) Cem Concr Res 35:680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Demirbog R (2003) Energy Build 35:189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blanco F, Garcia P, Mateos P, Ayala J (2000) Cem Concr Res 30:1715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liao K-Y, Chang P-K, Peng Y-N, Yang C-C (2004) Cem Concr Res 34:977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cotterell B, Chiaa JYH, Hbaieba K (2007) Eng Fract Mater 74:1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Siddiqui NA, Woo RSC, Kim J-K, Leung CCK, Munir A (2007) Composite Part A Appl Sci Manuf 38:449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hbaieb K, Wang QX, Chia YHJ, Cotterell B (2007) Polymer 48:901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chowdhury FH, Hosur MV, Jeelani S (2006) Mater Sci Eng 421:298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lu M, Lau K-K, Tam W-Y, Liao K (2006) Carbon 44:383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang Q, Wang J, Cheng S (2002) J Funct Polym 15(3):271Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ganguli S (2005) Synthesis and characterization of nanostructured polymer composites, Ph.D. Thesis, May 2005, Tuskegee UniversityGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li G (2004) Cem Concr Res 34:1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rizwan SA (2006) High-performance mortar and concretes using secondary raw materials, Ph.D. Thesis, Technischen Universitat Bergakademie Freiberg, 2006Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    ASTM C140-01 (2001) Standard test methods for sampling and testing concrete masonry units and related units. Annual book of American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Canakcia H, Demirbog R, Karakoc MB, Sirina O (2007) Build Environ 42:1777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kuo W-T, Lin K-L, Chang W-C, Luo H-L (2006) J Ind Eng Chem 12:702Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Palacios M, Sierra C, Puertas F (2003) Mater Construct 53(269):89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heikal M, Morsy MS, Aiad I (2005) Cem Concr Res 35:680CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Engineering, Architecture and Physical SciencesTuskegee UniversityTuskegeeUSA

Personalised recommendations