Reactivity tests for supplementary cementitious materials: RILEM TC 267-TRM phase 1
A primary aim of RILEM TC 267-TRM: “Tests for Reactivity of Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs)” is to compare and evaluate the performance of conventional and novel SCM reactivity test methods across a wide range of SCMs. To this purpose, a round robin campaign was organized to investigate 10 different tests for reactivity and 11 SCMs covering the main classes of materials in use, such as granulated blast furnace slag, fly ash, natural pozzolan and calcined clays. The methods were evaluated based on the correlation to the 28 days relative compressive strength of standard mortar bars containing 30% of SCM as cement replacement and the interlaboratory reproducibility of the test results. It was found that only a few test methods showed acceptable correlation to the 28 days relative strength over the whole range of SCMs. The methods that showed the best reproducibility and gave good correlations used the R3 model system of the SCM and Ca(OH)2, supplemented with alkali sulfate/carbonate. The use of this simplified model system isolates the reaction of the SCM and the reactivity can be easily quantified from the heat release or bound water content. Later age (90 days) strength results also correlated well with the results of the IS 1727 (Indian standard) reactivity test, an accelerated strength test using an SCM/Ca(OH)2-based model system. The current standardized tests did not show acceptable correlations across all SCMs, although they performed better when latently hydraulic materials (blast furnace slag) were excluded. However, the Frattini test, Chapelle and modified Chapelle test showed poor interlaboratory reproducibility, demonstrating experimental difficulties. The TC 267-TRM will pursue the development of test protocols based on the R3 model systems. Acceleration and improvement of the reproducibility of the IS 1727 test will be attempted as well.
KeywordsSupplementary cementitious materials Reactivity test Heat release Bound water Compressive strength
Francois Avet (EPFL, Switzerland), Luigi Brunetti (Empa, Switzerland), Nele De Belie (Ghent University, Belgium), Paweł T. Durdziński (HeidelbergCement Technology, Germany), Alexandre Ouzia (EPFL, Switzerland), Olga Perebatova (Univeristy of Toronto, Canada), Yury Villagrán Zaccardi (Ghent University, Belgium) and Bing Wang (Sinoma, China) are gratefully acknowledged for their contribution to this work.
A. Parashar and S. Bishnoi acknowledge financial support by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) grant 81026665.A. M. Joseph acknowledges the financial support from the foundations SIM (Strategic Initiative Materials in Flanders) and VLAIO (Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship) of Project ASHCEM within the program “MARES”S. Kramar acknowledges the financial support from the Slovenian Research Agency (research core funding No. P2-0273).T. Sui acknowledges the support by National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFE0206100 and 2017YFB0310905) financed by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (MOST).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All co-authors are members in RILEM TC 267-TRM. None of the co-authors has financial conflict of interest.
- 1.Chapelle J (1958) Attaque sulfocalcique des laitiers et pouzzolanes. Rev Matér Constr 512:136–145Google Scholar
- 2.Raverdy M, Brivot F, Paillère A, Bron R (1980) Appréciation de l’activité pouzzolanique de constituents secondaires. In: Proceedings of 7e congrés international de la chimie des ciments, Paris, pp 6–41Google Scholar
- 3.Frattini N (1949) Richerche sulla calce di idrolisi nelle paste di cimento. Ann di Chim Appl 39:616–620Google Scholar
- 4.Snellings R, Scrivener K (2015) Rapid screening tests for supplementary cementitious materials: past and future. Mater Struct. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0718-z
- 6.Scrivener KL, Lothenbach B, De Belie N, Gruyaert E, Skibsted J, Snellings R, Vollpracht A (2015) TC 238-SCM: hydration and microstructure of concrete with SCMs State of the art on methods to determine degree of reaction of SCMs. Mater Struct 48(4):835–862. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0527-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Durdziński PT, Ben Haha M, Bernal SA, De Belie N, Gruyaert E, Lothenbach B, Menéndez Méndez E, Provis JL, Schöler A, Stabler C, Tan Z, Villagrán Zaccardi Y, Vollpracht A, Winnefeld F, Zając M, Scrivener KL (2017) Outcomes of the RILEM round robin on degree of reaction of slag and fly ash in blended cements. Mater Struct 50(2):135. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-017-1002-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Helsel MA, Ferraris CF, Bentz D (2015) Comparative study of methods to measure the density of Cementitious powders. J Test Eval 44(6):2147–2154Google Scholar
- 14.Snellings R, Chwast J, Cizer Ö, De Belie N, Dhandapani Y, Durdzinski P, Elsen J, Haufe J, Hooton D, Patapy C, Santhanam M, Scrivener K, Snoeck D, Steger L, Tongbo S, Vollpracht A, Winnefeld F, Lothenbach B (2018) Report of TC 238-SCM: hydration stoppage methods for phase assemblage studies of blended cements—results of a round robin test. Mater Struct 51(4):111. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1237-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Snellings R, et.al. (2018) TC 238-SCM: RILEM TC-238 SCM recommendation on hydration stoppage by solvent exchange for the study of hydrate assemblages. Mater Struct. (under review)Google Scholar
- 16.Lothenbach B, De Weerdt K (2016) Thermogravimetric analysis. A practical guide to microstructural analysis of cementitious materials. CRC Press, Oxford, pp 177–212Google Scholar
- 17.Geiker M (2016) Characterisation of development of cement hydration using chemical shrinkage. A practical guide to microstructural analysis of cementitious materials. CRC Press, Oxford, pp 75–105Google Scholar