Advertisement

Effects of fly ash microspheres on sulfate erosion resistance and chlorion penetration resistance in concrete

  • Xueming Wang
  • Jun YuanEmail author
  • Peng Wei
  • Mengwei Zhu
Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

Fly ash microsphere (FAM) is a superfine fly ash product consisting of perfectly spherical and smooth particles. In this study, FAM was added to concrete for use in saline soil areas. The replacement levels of cement by FAM were 10% and 20% with a water-to-binder (w/b) ratio of 0.42. The hydration heat, thermogravimetric (TG) analysis, rheological performance, and the flowability of pure cement (CF0) and FAM-doped cement (CF10 and CF20) were investigated. The second exothermic peak occurred earlier and was higher in the FAM-doped cement than the CF0. The results showed that the nucleation effect of the FAM accelerated the early hydration speed of the cement. The TG results indicated that the Ca(OH)2 consumption was higher at 28 days due the addition of the FAM, which improved the interfacial transition zone and blocked the connected porosity of the hardened cement paste. The ball-bearing effect of the FAM particles in the paste reduced the internal friction between the grains, thereby significantly improving the rheology and the flowability of the cement paste. In addition, the filler effect of the FAM particles significantly improved the pore structure, which increased the compressive strength and chlorion penetration of the concrete. It was also found that the FAM increased the workability while improving the resistance of the concrete to sulfate attack when exposed to multiple drying–wetting cycles.

Keywords

Fly ash microsphere Saline soil Chlorion penetration Sulfate attack Drying–wetting cycles 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Zhuang SY, Wang Q, Zhou YQ. Research on the resistance to saline soil erosion of high-volume mineral admixture steam-cured concrete. Constr Build Mater. 2019;202:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pasupathy K, Berndt M, Sanjayan J, Rajeev P, Cheema DS. Durability of low-calcium fly ash based geopolymer concrete culvert in a saline environment. Cem Concr Res. 2017;100:297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neville A. The confused world of sulfate attack on concrete. Cem Concr Res. 2004;34:1275–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen F, Gao JM, Qi B, Shen DM, Li LY. Degradation progress of concrete subject to combined sulfate–chloride attack under drying–wetting cycles and flexural loading. Constr Build Mater. 2017;151:164–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nie LX, Xu JY, Bai E. Dynamic stress–strain relationship of concrete subjected to chloride and sulfate attack. Constr Build Mater. 2018;165:232–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang DZ, Zhou XM, Fu B, Zhang LR. Chloride ion penetration resistance of concrete containing fly ash and silica fume against combined freezing–thawing and chloride attack. Constr Build Mater. 2018;169:740–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shi MX, Wang Q, Zhou ZK. Comparison of the properties between high-volume fly ash concrete and high-volume steel slag concrete under temperature matching curing condition. Constr Build Mater. 2015;98:649–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lorente S, Pierre M, Cubaynes Y, Auger J. Sulfate transfer through concrete: migration and diffusion results. Cem Concr Compos. 2011;33:735–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferraris CF, Stutzman PE, Snyder KA. Sulfate resistance of concrete: a new approach. R&D serial no. 2486. Skokie: Portland Cement Association; 2006.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu GJ, Zhang YS, Ni ZW, Huang R. Corrosion behavior of steel submitted to chloride and sulphate ions in simulated concrete pore solution. Constr Build Mater. 2016;115:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdelmseeh VA, Jofriet J, Hayward G. Sulphate and sulphide corrosion in livestock buildings, part I: concrete deterioration. Biosyst Eng. 2008;99:372–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang ZQ, Wang Q, Chen HH, Zhou YQ. Influence of the initial moist curing time on the sulfate attack resistance of concretes with different binders. Constr Build Mater. 2017;144:541–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang Q, Wang DQ, Zhuang SY. The soundness of steel slag with different free CaO and MgO contents. Constr Build Mater. 2017;151:138–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kwan AKH, Chen JJ. Adding fly ash microsphere to improve packing density, flowability and strength of cement paste. Powder Technol. 2013;234:19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Collins F, Sanjayan JG. Effects of ultra-fine materials on workability and strength of concrete containing alkali-activated slag as the binder. Cem Concr Res. 1999;29:459–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaikh FUA, Supit SWM. Compressive strength and durability properties of high volume fly ash (HVFA) concretes containing ultrafine fly ash (UFFA). Constr Build Mater. 2015;82:192–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen JJ, Ng PL, Li LG, Kwan AKH. Production of high-performance concrete by addition of fly ash microsphere and condensed silica fume. Procedia Eng. 2017;172:165–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang Q, Wang DQ, Chen HH. The role of fly ash microsphere in the microstructure and macroscopic properties of high-strength concrete. Cem Concr Compos. 2017;83:125–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laskar AI, Talukdar S. Rheological behavior of high performance concrete with mineral admixtures and their blending. Constr Build Mater. 2008;22:2345–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sun W, Yan HD, Zhan BG. Analysis of mechanism on water-reducing effect of fine ground slag, high-calcium fly ash, and low-calcium fly ash. Cem Concr Res. 2003;33:1119–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kwan AKH, Li Y. Effects of fly ash microsphere on rheology, adhesiveness and strength of mortar. Constr Build Mater. 2013;42:137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yang T, Zhua HJ, Zhang ZH, Gao X, Zhang CS, Wu QS. Effect of fly ash microsphere on the rheology and microstructure of alkali-activated fly ash/slag pastes. Cem Concr Res. 2018;109:198–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Provis JL, Duxson P, Deventer JSJV. The role of particle technology in developing sustainable construction materials. Adv Powder Technol. 2010;21:2–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sun JF, Shen XD, Tan G, Tanner JTE. Compressive strength and hydration characteristics of high-volume fly ash concrete prepared from fly ash. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;136:565–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Escalante JI, Gomez LY, Johal KK, Mendoza G, Mancha H, Méndeza J. Reactivity of blast-furnace slag in Portland cement blends hydrated under different conditions. Cem Concr Res. 2001;31(10):1403–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wczelik WN. Heat evolution in hydration cementitious systems admixture with fly ash. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2001;65:613–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Han FH, Zhang ZQ, Liu JH, Yan PY. Hydration kinetics of composite binder containing fly ash at different temperatures. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2016;124:1691–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Feng JJ, Liu SH, Wang ZG. Effects of ultrafine fly ash on the properties of high-strength concrete. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2015;121:1213–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Collepardi M. A state-of-the-art review on delayed ettringite attack on concrete. Cem Concr Compos. 2003;25:401–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northwest Electric Power Design Institute Co., Ltd. of China Power Engineering Consulting GroupXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations