| Literature DB >> 30669570 |
Jacob L G Lim1, Sudharshan N Raman2,3, Md Safiuddin4,5, Muhammad Fauzi Mohd Zain6,7, Roszilah Hamid8.
Abstract
The mix design of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is complicated by the presence of many "ingredients." The fundamental packing density allows a simpler mix design with fewer ingredients to achieve optimum packing density and dense microstructure. The optimum particle grading increases the flowability of UHPC and eliminates entrapped air. This study presents a simplified particle grading design approach that positively influences the strength, autogenous shrinkage, and microstructure characteristics of UHPC. Carbon nanofibers (CNFs) of superior mechanical properties were added to enhance the strength of UHPC and to reduce its autogenous shrinkage. In addition, ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) was used as a cement replacement material to reduce the amount of cement in UHPC mixes. Test results showed that the presence of homogeneously dispersed CNF increased the compressive strength and compensated the autogenous shrinkage of UHPC. The findings indicated that an ideal particle distribution, which is close to the modified Andreasen and Andersen grading model, contributed to achieving high compressive strength and CNFs were capable of providing nano-bridges to compensate the shrinkage caused by GGBS.Entities:
Keywords: autogenous shrinkage; carbon nanofibers (CNFs); compressive strength; entrapped air; flowability; microstructure; nanostructure; particle grading; ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC)
Year: 2019 PMID: 30669570 PMCID: PMC6356672 DOI: 10.3390/ma12020320
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Major properties of solid materials used in concrete mixes.
| Properties | OPC | GGBS | Silica Sand | Silica Flour |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specific gravity | 3.15 | 2.99 | 2.60 | 2.60 |
| Specific surface area (m2/kg) | 365 | 410 | 120 | 600 |
| SiO2 (%) | 21.00 | 39.00 | 98.7 | 99.5 |
| Al2O3 (%) | 5.31 | 12.50 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
| Fe2O3 (%) | 3.44 | 0.30 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
| CaO (%) | 65.00 | 39.50 | - | - |
| MgO (%) | 1.50 | 4.10 | 0.4 | 0.1 |
| SO3 (%) | 0.26 | - | - | - |
| Na2O (%) | 0.50 | 0.35 | - | - |
| K2O (%) | 0.25 | 0.75 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
Figure 1Particle size distribution of different ingredients used in different concrete mixes.
Figure 2Transmission electron microscope (TEM) image of carbon nanofiber (CNF), a closer nano-structure of an individual fiber.
Mix proportions of the designated concretes with and without CNFs.
| Mix | Cement | GGBS | Silica Flour | Silica Sand | Water | SP | CNFs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.00 | - | 0.40 | - | 0.22 | 0.012 | - |
| 2 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.40 | - | 0.22 | 0.008 | - |
| 3 | 1.00 | - | - | 0.40 | 0.22 | 0.010 | - |
| 4 | 1.00 | - | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.012 | - |
| 5 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.008 | - |
| 6 | 1.00 | - | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.011 | 0.00067 |
| 7 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.008 | 0.00067 |
Figure 3(a) Particle morphology of silica sand, (b) particle morphology of silica flour.
Figure 4Flow test of concrete Mix 1.
Figure 5Optimum particle grading of the designated concrete mixes.
Figure 6Binary analysis of the cross-section of different concrete mixes.
Figure 7Flowability of the designated concrete mixes.
Figure 8Entrapped air content of different concrete mixes.
Figure 9Microstructural image of concrete Mix 4.
Figure 10Microstructural image of concrete Mix 5.
Figure 11Microstructural image of concrete Mix 7.
Figure 12Compressive strength of different concrete mixes.
Figure 13Time-dependent autogenous shrinkage of different concretes.