Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Admixture compatibility in metakaolin–portland-limestone cement blends

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite potential benefits including enhanced mechanical properties, reduced permeability, and decreased environmental impact, higher rates of metakaolin substitution for cement (> 10% MK by mass of cement) have been limited practically because of lower workability in such mixtures. When metakaolin is combined with portland-limestone cement (PLC), potential synergies further enhance hardened concrete performance and decrease environmental impact, but the greater surface area of PLCs suggests even greater challenges for workability in such blends. This study evaluates four water-reducing admixture chemistries-polycarboxylate ether (PCE), calcium lignosulfonate (LS), naphthalene formaldehyde condensate (PNS) and polymelamine sulfonate (PMS)—to assess their effectiveness in metakaolin-PLC combinations at up to 30% MK. At that upper bound, only PCE and PMS impart adequate workability within their recommended dosage limits. While PMS delays tricalcium silicate hydration and LS shows significant incompatibilities at higher MK contents, PCE has the least effect on hydration and can be used at a consistent dosage rate up to 30% MK.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Huntzinger DN, Eatmon TD (2009) A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing: comparing the traditional process with alternative technologies. J Clean Prod 17(7):668–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cassagnabère F, Escadeillas G, Mouret M (2009) Study of the reactivity of cement/metakaolin binders at early age for specific use in steam cured precast concrete. Constr Build Mater 23(2):775–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Antoni M et al (2012) Cement substitution by a combination of metakaolin and limestone. Cem Concr Res 42(12):1579–1589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ramezanianpour AA, Bahrami H (2012) Jovein, Influence of metakaolin as supplementary cementing material on strength and durability of concretes. Constr Build Mater 30:470–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rojas MFA, Cabrera J (2002) The effect of temperature on the hydration rate and stability of the hydration phases of metakaolin–lime–water systems. Cem Concr Res 32(1):133–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wild S, Khatib JM (1997) Portlandite consumption in metakaolin cement pastes and mortars. Cem Concr Res 27(1):137–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. ASTM C595 (2014) Standard specification for blended hydraulic cements. ASTM international, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  8. En B (2000) 197-1 (2000) Cement: composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements. British Standards Institution, London

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bushi L, Meil J (2014) An environmental life cycle assessment of portland limestone and ordinary portland cements in concrete. Cement Association of Canada, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  10. Heikal M, El-Didamony H, Morsy MS (2000) Limestone-filled pozzolanic cement. Cem Concr Res 30(11):1827–1834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tsivilis S et al (1999) A study on the parameters affecting the properties of portland limestone cements. Cement Concr Compos 21(2):107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Feldman R, Ramachandran VS, Sereda PJ (1965) Influence of CaCO3 on the Hydration of 3CaO·Al2O3. J Am Ceram Soc 48(1):25–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Matschei T, Lothenbach B, Glasser FP (2007) The role of calcium carbonate in cement hydration. Cem Concr Res 37(4):551–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zaribaf BH, Uzal B, Kurtis K (2015) Compatibility of Superplasticizers with Limestone–Metakaolin blended cementitious system. In: Scrivener K, Favier A (eds) Calcined clays for sustainable concrete. Springer, Berlin, pp 427–434

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. ASTM C494 (2015) Standard specification for chemical admixtures for concrete. West Conshohocken, PA

  16. Erdoǧdu Ş (2000) Compatibility of superplasticizers with cements different in composition. Cem Concr Res 30(5):767–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Perenchio W, Whiting D, Kantro D (1979) Water reduction, slump loss, and entrained air-void systems as influenced by superplasticizers. Special Publication 62:137–156

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nadelman E (2016) Hydration and microstructural development of portland limestone cement-based materials. In: Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

  19. Kantro D (1982) Influence of water-reducing admixtures on properties of cement paste: a miniature slump test. Portland Cement Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. ASTM C143 (2015) Standard test method for slump of hydraulic-cement concrete. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  21. ASTM C1679–14 (2014) Standard practice for measuring hydration kinetics of hydraulic cementitious mixtures using isothermal calorimetry. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  22. ASTM C1679 (2014) Standard practice for measuring hydration kinetics of hydraulic cementitious mixtures using isothermal calorimetry. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang J, Scherer GW (2011) Comparison of methods for arresting hydration of cement. Cem Concr Res 41(10):1024–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Scrivener K, Snellings R, Lothenbach B (2016) A practical guide to microstructural analysis of cementitious materials. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roberts LR, Sandberg PJ (2005) Cement-admixture interactions related to aluminate control. J ASTM Int 2(6):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  26. Collepardi M (1998) Admixtures used to enhance placing characteristics of concrete. Cement Concr Compos 20(2):103–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Chandra S, Flodin P (1987) Interactions of polymers and organic admixtures on portland cement hydration. Cem Concr Res 17(6):875–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Danner T et al (2015) Phase changes during the early hydration of Portland cement with Ca-lignosulfonates. Cem Concr Res 69:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Payá J et al (2003) Evaluation of the pozzolanic activity of fluid catalytic cracking catalyst residue (FC3R). Thermogravimetric analysis studies on FC3R-portland cement pastes. Cem Concr Res 33(4):603–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Alarcon-Ruiz L et al (2005) The use of thermal analysis in assessing the effect of temperature on a cement paste. Cem Concr Res 35(3):609–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. McCarthy GJ, Hassett DJ, Bender JA (1991) Synthesis, crystal chemistry and stability of ettringite, a material with potential applications in hazardous waste immobilization. In: MRS proceedings. Cambridge University Press

  32. Damidot D, Glasser FP (1995) Investigation of the CaO-Al2O3-SiO2-H2O system at 25 C by thermodynamic calculations. Cem Concr Res 25(1):22–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. St Stöber S, Pöllmann H (1998) Crystalchemistry of organic sulfonates used as cement additives. In: Delhez R, Mittemeijer EJ (eds) Materials science forum. Trans Tech Publications, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rojas MF et al (2003) The effect of high curing temperature on the reaction kinetics in MK/lime and MK-blended cement matrices at 60 C. Cem Concr Res 33(5):643–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Young J (1962) Hydration of tricalcium aluminate with lignosulphonate additives. Mag Concr Res 14(42):137–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rojas MF, Sánchez de Rojas MI (2005) Influence of metastable hydrated phases on the pore size distribution and degree of hydration of MK-blended cements cured at 60 C. Cem Concr Res 35(7):1292–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wild S, Khatib JM, Jones A (1996) Relative strength, pozzolanic activity and cement hydration in superplasticised metakaolin concrete. Cem Concr Res 26(10):1537–1544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ramachandran VS (1996) Concrete admixtures handbook: properties, science and technology. William Andrew, Norwich

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bishop M, Barron AR (2006) Cement hydration inhibition with sucrose, tartaric acid, and lignosulfonate: analytical and spectroscopic study. Ind Eng Chem Res 45(21):7042–7049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sakai E et al (1980) Influence of sodium aromatic sulfonates on the hydration of tricalcium aluminate with or without gypsym. Cem Concr Res 10(3):311–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gu P et al (1994) Investigation of the retarding effect of superplasticizers on cement hydration by impedance spectroscopy and other methods. Cem Concr Res 24(3):433–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Singh NB, Sarvahi R, Singh NP (1992) Effect of superplasticizers on the hydration of cement. Cem Concr Res 22(5):725–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sakai E et al (2006) Influence of superplasticizers on the hydration of cement and the pore structure of hardened cement. Cem Concr Res 36(11):2049–2053

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by Burgess Pigment Company and Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) under Project No. GDOT 02-127.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332, USA

    Behnaz H. Zaribaf & Kimberly E. Kurtis

Authors
  1. Behnaz H. Zaribaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimberly E. Kurtis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly E. Kurtis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zaribaf, B.H., Kurtis, K.E. Admixture compatibility in metakaolin–portland-limestone cement blends. Mater Struct 51, 33 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1154-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1154-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation