| Literature DB >> 28787950 |
Xiao Zhao1, Siong-Kang Lim2, Cher-Siang Tan3, Bo Li4, Tung-Chai Ling4, Runqiu Huang5, Qingyuan Wang6.
Abstract
Foamed mortar with a density of 1300 kg/m³ was prepared. In the initial laboratory trials, water-to-cement (w/c) ratios ranging from 0.54 to 0.64 were tested to determine the optimal value for foamed mortar corresponding to the highest compressive strength without compromising its fresh state properties. With the obtained optimal w/c ratio of 0.56, two types of foamed mortar were prepared, namely cement-foamed mortar (CFM) and slag-foamed mortar (SFM, 50% cement was replaced by slag weight). Four different curing conditions were adopted for both types of foamed mortar to assess their compressive strength, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) and thermal insulation performance. The test results indicated that utilizing 50% of slag as cement replacement in the production of foamed mortar improved the compressive strength, UPV and thermal insulation properties. Additionally, the initial water curing of seven days gained higher compressive strength and increased UPV values as compared to the air cured and natural weather curing samples. However, this positive effect was more pronounced in the case of compressive strength than in the UPV and thermal conductivity of foamed mortar.Entities:
Keywords: curing regime; foamed mortar; slag; strength; thermal properties; water-to-cement ratio
Year: 2015 PMID: 28787950 PMCID: PMC5455276 DOI: 10.3390/ma8020462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Chemical compositions, physical, and mechanical properties of cement and slag.
| Chemical Constituents(%) | Cement | Slag |
|---|---|---|
| SiO2 | 21.1 | 32.5 |
| Al2O3 | 5.2 | 13.8 |
| Fe2O3 | 3.1 | 0.2 |
| CaO | 64.4 | 42.9 |
| MgO | 1.1 | 5.8 |
| SO3 | 2.5 | - |
| Na2O | 0.2 | - |
| K2O | 0.6 | - |
| P2O2 | <0.9 | - |
| Carbon content | - | - |
| Physical Properties | - | - |
| Specific gravity | 3.2 | 2.9 |
| Fineness (% passing 45 μm) | 93.0 | 100 |
Summary of experimental work details in series 1 and 2.
| ILT-0.54 | 1 (500:500) | 1:0 (500:0) | 550 | 0.54 | Water | 1. Fresh state properties (table flow spread and self-compacting slump spread) |
| ILT-0.56 | 523 | 0.56 | ||||
| ILT-0.58 | 502 | 0.58 | ||||
| ILT-0.60 | 480 | 0.60 | ||||
| ILT-0.62 | 465 | 0.62 | ||||
| ILT-0.64 | 448 | 0.64 | ||||
| CFM-A | 1 (500:500) | 1:0 (500:0) | 518 | 0.56 | 28 Air | 1. Compressive strength |
| CFM-NW | 7 Water + 21 Air | |||||
| CFM-W+A | 28 NW | |||||
| CFM-W+NW | 7 Water + 21 NW | |||||
| SFM-A | 0.5:0.5 (250:250) | 512 | 28 Air | |||
| SFM-NW | 7 Water + 21 Air | |||||
| SFM-W+A | 28 NW | |||||
| SFM-W+NW | 7 Water + 21 NW | |||||
c/s = cementitious-to-sand ratio; w/c = water-to-cement ratio; NW = natural weather, ILT = Initial Laboratory Trails; CFM = Cement-foamed mortar; SFM = Slag-foamed mortar; * Foam volume (in liter per m3) decreased when the w/c ratio increased.
Figure 1The position of the specimens inside the guarded hot box.
Figure 2The typical setup for a thermal conductivity test.
Figure 3Effect of water-to-cement (w/c) ratios on spread and invert slump values, and seven-day compressive strength of series 1 foamed mortar.
Figure 4Effect of curing conditions on 28-day compressive strength of foamed mortar.
Figure 5Strength change as a function of density yielded under different curing conditions.
Figure 6Effect of curing conditions on 28-day ultrasonic pulse velocity of foamed mortar.
Figure 7Effect of curing conditions on 28-day thermal conductivity of foamed mortar.