| Literature DB >> 35406165 |
Guoqiang Gong1, Menghuan Guo1,2,3, Yingwu Zhou1,2,3, Shuyue Zheng1, Biao Hu1,2,3, Zhongfeng Zhu1,2,3, Zhenyu Huang1,2,3.
Abstract
Limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) is successfully used to fabricate engineered cementitious composites (ECC) exhibiting tensile strength σtu of 9.55 ± 0.59 MPa or tensile strain capacity εtu of 8.53 ± 0.30%. The high tensile strength of the composites is closely related to the improvement of fiber/matrix interfacial bond strength, and the high ductility is attributed to the enhancement of fiber dispersion homogeneity. For the case of ECC incorporating 50% LC3, the reduction of initial cracking stress σtc that favors the growth of the crack in a controlled manner also contributes to the improvement of strain hardening behavior. The composition analysis indicates that carboaluminates and additional hydration products including C-(A)-S-H and ettringite are generated, which contributes to the densification of the microstructure of the ECC matrix. The pore structure is thus remarkably refined. Besides, when ordinary Portland cement (OPC) is partly replaced by LC3, the consumed energy and equivalent CO2 emission decrease, especially the equivalent CO2 emission with the reduction ratio attaining 40.31%. It is found that ECC using 35% LC3 exhibits the highest mechanical resistance and ECC incorporating 50% LC3 shows the highest ductility from the environmental point of view.Entities:
Keywords: engineered cementitious composites; fiber dispersion; limestone calcined clay cement; strain; strength
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406165 PMCID: PMC9003509 DOI: 10.3390/polym14071291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Mixture proportion of ECC (kg/m3).
| Mixture Type | Cement | Calcined Clay | Gypsum | Water | Limestone | Quatrz Sand | PE | HRWR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 1382 | 0 | 0 | 345 | 0 | 500 | 20 | 6 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 905 | 304 | 21 | 345 | 152 | 500 | 20 | 13 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 732 | 415 | 28 | 345 | 207 | 500 | 20 | 18 |
Figure 1Grading curves of the ingredients.
Chemical composition of cementitious binders *.
| Property | Cement | Calcined Clay | Gypsum | Limestone |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MgO (%) | 1.775 | 0.307 | 3.394 | 0.769 |
| Na2O (%) | 0.281 | - | - | - |
| Al2O3 (%) | 3.509 | 39.405 | 5.828 | 0.130 |
| SiO2 (%) | 15.406 | 53.732 | 14.046 | 0.309 |
| P2O5 (%) | 0.065 | 0.037 | 0.050 | - |
| SO3 (%) | 4.212 | 0.087 | 35.867 | - |
| K2O (%) | 0.0950 | 4.229 | 1.403 | 0.040 |
| CaO (%) | 69.862 | 0.102 | 37.048 | 98.715 |
| Fe2O3 (%) | 3.741 | 2.056 | 2.032 | - |
| CuO (%) | 0.029 | - | - | - |
| ZnO (%) | 0.100 | - | - | - |
| SrO (%) | 0.070 | - | 0.333 | 0.037 |
| Rb2O (%) | - | 0.037 | - | - |
| Y2O3 (%) | - | 0.001 | - | - |
| ZrO2 (%) | - | 0.008 | - | - |
* XRF analysis carried out by ZSX Primus II X-Ray Fluorimeter, Rigaku.
Properties of PE fibers *.
| PE fiber | |
|---|---|
| Length | 18 |
| Diameter | 25 |
| Aspect ratio | 720 |
| Fiber strength, MPa | 2900 |
| Modulus of elasticity, GPa | 116 |
| Specific gravity, g/cm3 | 0.97 |
| Melting temperature, °C | 150 |
* Provided by the supplier of PE fiber, the company QUANTUMETA in Beijing, China.
Figure 2Dog-bone shaped specimen for tensile test: (a) geometric size; (b) test instrument. (unit: mm).
Figure 3Fluorescence image of the cross-section of the ruptured specimen after tensile test.
Figure 4Setup for single fiber pullout test.
Figure 5Pore distribution.
Figure 6Cumulative pore volume.
Porosity of ECC matrix.
| Mixtures ID | Porosity (%) |
|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 16.38 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 7.22 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 12.42 |
Figure 7XRD patterns.
Figure 8TGA and DTG curves.
Relative content of Ca(OH)2 calculated based on DTG curves.
| Mixtures ID | CH Content (%) |
|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 10.15 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 5.67 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 2.41 |
Flowability.
| Mixture ID | Average Value (mm) |
|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 159 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 156 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 151 |
Figure 9Compressive strength.
Figure 10Tensile stress-strain curves of the three types of ECC: (a) ECC-PC; (b) ECC-LC3–35; (c) ECC-LC3–50; (d) representative curve.
Figure 11Bilinear model for the tensile stress-strain curve of ECC.
Figure 12Characteristic parameters of the three types of ECC: (a) initial cracking stress; (b) peak stress; (c) strain capacity; (d) strain energy.
Figure 13Crack patterns of the three types of ECC after the rupture of the specimen: (a) ECC-PC; (b) ECC-LC3–35; (c) ECC-LC3–50.
Cracking characteristics.
| Mixtures ID |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 43 ± 3 | 1.87 ± 0.13 | 125.58 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 48 ± 5 | 1.69 ± 0.18 | 121.04 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 68 ± 6 | 1.19 ± 0.10 | 125.44 |
Fiber dispersion coefficient.
| Mixtures ID | αf |
|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 0.643 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 0.801 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 0.781 |
Figure 14Single fiber pullout curves: (a) ECC-PC; (b) ECC-LC3–35; (c) ECC-LC3–50.
Frictional bond strength τ0. (Unit: MPa).
| Mixtures ID | Average Value | Standard Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| ECC-PC | 0.498 | 0.023 |
| ECC-LC3–35 | 0.630 | 0.066 |
| ECC-LC3–50 | 0.434 | 0.036 |
Figure 15Summarization of the consumed energy by each component of ECC.
Figure 16Summary of the GWP by each component of ECC.
Figure 17Comparison of the energy consumption of ECC per unit tensile strain and per unit tensile strength.
Figure 18Comparison of the equivalent CO2 emission of ECC per unit tensile strain and per unit tensile strength.