| Literature DB >> 30857254 |
Hong Zhou1, Xin-Zhu Zhou2, Jian Zhang3, Jian-Jun Zheng4.
Abstract
The chloride diffusion coefficient of concrete plays an essential role in the durability assessment and design of concrete structures built in chloride-laden environments. The purpose of this paper is to present an effective medium method (EMM) for evaluating the chloride diffusion coefficient of mature fly ash cement paste. In this method, a numerical method is used to estimate the degrees of hydration of cement and fly ash. Fly ash cement paste is then modeled as a two-phase composite material, composed of a solid phase and a pore space. By introducing the percolation theory, the EMM is modified to derive the chloride diffusion coefficient of fly ash cement paste in an analytical manner. To verify the EMM, a chloride diffusion test of fly ash cement paste at a curing age of up to 540 days is conducted. It is shown that, within a reasonable fly ash content, a larger fly ash content and/or curing age results in a smaller chloride diffusion coefficient. The chloride diffusion coefficient decreases with a decreasing water/binder ratio. Finally, the validity of the EMM is verified with experimental results.Entities:
Keywords: chloride diffusion coefficient; effective medium approach; fly ash cement paste; percolation theory
Year: 2019 PMID: 30857254 PMCID: PMC6427424 DOI: 10.3390/ma12050811
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
The kinetic parameters of clinker phases at different hydration stages.
| Kinetic Parameter | Clinker Phase | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3S | C2S | C3A | C4AF | |
| K1 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.37 |
| N1 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 0.7 |
| K2 | 3.3 | 5.0 | 3.2 | 3.7 |
| K3 | 0.05 | 0.006 | 0.04 | 0.015 |
| N3 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.4 |
The parameters in the hydration model of fly ash.
| Bf (cm/h) | Cf (cm/(cm4·h)) | krf (cm/h) | Def0 (cm2/h) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.51 × 10−9 | 1.00 × 1015 | 1.71 × 10−6 | 8.58 × 10−8 |
Figure 1A comparison between the numerical estimate and experimental results of Haha et al. [34].
Figure 2A comparison between the empirical formula and experimental results of Yu [36].
Chemical compositions of fly ash and cement.
| Material | CaO | SiO2 | Al2O3 | Fe2O3 | MgO | SO3 | K2O | Na2O | Loss of Ignition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fly ash | 5.40 | 47.00 | 31.30 | 4.40 | 0.49 | 0.77 | 0.90 | 0.78 | 3.22 |
| Cement | 64.40 | 20.36 | 4.96 | 3.17 | 2.09 | 1.98 | 0.64 | 0.14 | 1.27 |
Figure 3The relationship between Dfc and t for fly ash cement paste with w/b of 0.5.
Figure 4Relationship between Dfc and t for fly ash cement paste with w/b of 0.4.
Figure 5Relationship between Dfc and t for fly ash cement paste with w/b of 0.6.