| Literature DB >> 29036917 |
María Pérez-Nicolás1, Íñigo Navarro-Blasco2, José M Fernández3, José Ignacio Alvarez4.
Abstract
Mortars with two different binders (Portland cement (Entities:
Keywords: Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM); alumina cement; calorimetry; cement; doped TiO2; hydration; nano-additives
Year: 2017 PMID: 29036917 PMCID: PMC5666494 DOI: 10.3390/nano7100329
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Chemical and mineralogical compositions of the raw cementing phases.
| Binding Phase | Mineralogical Phases | Chemical Composition | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main | Minor | Al2O3 (%) | CaO (%) | Fe2O3 (%) | SiO2 (%) | SO3 (%) | Na2O + K2O (%) | |
| PC | Ca3SiO5 (C3S), Ca2SiO4 (C2S) | Ca3Al2O6 (C3A), Ca4Al2Fe2O10 (C4AF), CaSO4·0.5H2O | 4.0 | 62.0 | 4.0 | 20.0 | 1.6 | 0.3 |
| HAC | CaAl2O4 (CA), CaAl4O8 (CA2) | Ca12Al14O33 (C12A7), CaCO3 (C) | 70.5 | 28.5 | 0.2 | 0.6 | <0.3 | <0.5 |
Characteristics of the photocatalytic additives.
| Photocatalytic Compound | Anatase (%) | Rutile (%) | Density (g cm−3) | Specific Surface Area (m2 g−1) | Particle Size (nm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TiO2 * | 78.8 | 21.2 | 4.3 | 50 | 21 |
| Fe-TiO2 | 69.1 | 30.9 | 3.9 | 101 | 16 |
| V-TiO2 | 77.5 | 22.5 | 3.4 | 113 | 15 |
* Density value provided by the manufacturer.
Water demand of different samples expressed as water/cement ratios.
| Sample | Control | TiO2 | Fe-TiO2 | V-TiO2 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.5% | 1.0% | 2.5% | 0.5% | 1.0% | 2.5% | 0.5% | 1.0% | 2.5% | |
| PC | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.37 | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.41 |
| HAC | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.36 |
Figure 1TEM micrographs of the nano-structured additives (×16,000): (a) TiO2; (b) Fe-TiO2; (c) V-TiO2.
Figure 2Particle size distribution obtained by light dispersion of the nano-structured photocatalytic additives in an alkaline solution (synthetic pore cement solution, pH 12.5 and 1 wt. % of CaCl2).
Figure 3XPS spectra of the O region, showing the three deconvolution peaks of the scans of the assayed photocatalysts. In blue, peak II is related to the adsorption of –OH groups.
Figure 4Isothermal calorimetry curves: (a,c) normalized heat flow and (b,d) total heat release of PC and HAC pastes with 2.5 wt. % of additives as compared with control (additive-free) sample.
Semi-quantitative XRD phase assemblage of aluminate phases and nano-additives in HAC samples after 28 days of curing condition 1 (20 °C and 95% Relative Humidity (RH)) and curing condition 2 (60 °C and 100% RH).
| HAC Control | * | * | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| HAC TiO2 | s | s | - | - | - | - | s | - |
| HAC Fe-TiO2 | * | s | - | - | - | - | s | - |
| HAC V-TiO2 | s | s | - | - | - | - | s | - |
| HAC Control | - | - | - | - | s | s | - | - |
| HAC TiO2 | - | - | - | - | s | s | - | - |
| HAC Fe-TiO2 | - | - | - | - | s | s | s | s |
| HAC V-TiO2 | - | - | - | - | s | * | - | - |
-: Non detectable; s: Small amount (less than 5 wt. %); * Significant amount (5–15%).
Figure 5Compressive strengths at different curing times of PC mortars with nano-structured photocatalysts.
Figure 6Pore size distribution results of PC samples after 28 curing days for: (a) TiO2; (b) Fe-TiO2; (c) V-TiO2.
Figure 7SEM micrographs of PC samples with: 2.5 wt. % of Fe-TiO2 (a–c) and 2.5 wt. % of V-TiO2 (d–f), after 28 curing days.
Figure 8Comparative Ti distribution (SEM-EDS) of PC mortars (after 28 curing days) with Fe-TiO2 and V-TiO2 nanostructured additives (included in 2.5 wt. %). For the purpose of clarity, due to the low ratio of Ti in the mortars, images were equally adjusted (brightness and contrast). Areas showing an accumulation of Ti in the V-TiO2 samples are indicated with arrows.
Figure 9Pore size distribution of HAC mortars with photocatalysts after: (a–c) 28 curing days at curing condition 1, 20 °C and 95% RH; (d–f) 28 curing days at curing condition 2, 60 °C and 100% RH.
Figure 10Compressive strengths at different curing times of HAC mortars: (a) Curing 20 °C, 95% RH; (b) Curing 60 °C, 100% RH, with nano-structured photocatalysts.
Figure 11Microstructural examination of HAC mortars (28 curing days) with nano-structured additives (2.5 wt. %): (a–c) Micrographs for samples with Fe-TiO2 after curing condition 1 (20 °C and 95% RH); (d–f) Micrographs for samples with V-TiO2 after curing condition 1; (g–i) Micrographs for samples with Fe-TiO2 after curing condition 2 (60 °C and 100% RH); (j–l) Micrographs for samples with V-TiO2 after curing condition 2. An enlargement of the encircled dotted area in (k) is shown in (l).
Figure 12Comparative Ti distribution (SEM-EDS) of HAC mortars (after 28 curing days) with Fe-TiO2 and V-TiO2 nanostructured additives (included in 2.5 wt. %). For the purpose of clarity, due to the low ratio of Ti in the mortars, images were equally adjusted (brightness and contrast). Areas showing an accumulation of Ti in the V-TiO2 samples are indicated with arrows.
Figure 13Water absorption of the mortars (after 28 curing days) in comparison with additive-free specimens (0%). Values measured after 1 and 2 h of water immersion.