Download PDF

Cement And Concrete Research

Publication date: 2010-06-01
Volume: 40 Pages: 908 - 913
Publisher: Elsevier

Author:

Craeye, B
De Schutter, G ; Desmet, B ; Vantomme, J ; Heirman, G ; Vandewalle, L ; Cizer, Ö ; Aggoun, S ; Kadri, EH

Keywords:

Faculteit Ontwerpwetenschappen, Ingenieurswetenschappen. Technologie, A1 Tijdschriftartikel, Science & Technology, Technology, Construction & Building Technology, Materials Science, Multidisciplinary, Materials Science, Self-compacting concrete, Filler, Shrinkage, CEMENT PASTES, LIMESTONE FILLER, EARLY AGE, HYDRATION, MICROSTRUCTURE, DEFORMATIONS, 0904 Chemical Engineering, 0905 Civil Engineering, 1202 Building, Building & Construction, 3302 Building, 4005 Civil engineering, 4016 Materials engineering

Abstract:

Based on an experimental programme, including autogenous shrinkage tests on concrete, ultrasonic monitoring of fresh concrete, and mercury intrusion porosimetry, the influence of the filler type on the autogenous shrinkage of self-compacting concrete has been investigated. The onset of percolating structure formation (time zero) is influenced by the filler type due to a possible accelerating effect of the filler on the cement hydration. Limestone filler accelerates the hydration process, and reduces time zero, while this is not the case when using quartzite filler. Using fly ash, showing only a slight acceleration, a slight reduction of time zero is obtained. A very significant swelling peak is noticed during the first day. This swelling peak is not a measuring artefact, but is caused mainly by water absorption on the filler surface and resulting disjoining pressure. Some part of the swelling peak might also be caused by Ca(OH)2 crystallisation. The fineness of the filler is an important factor for this swelling behaviour, although also the nature of the filler seems to have an influence. The superplasticiser also interacts with the fillers, influencing the swelling behaviour. The different filler types used in this study did not lead to significant differences in critical pore diameter of the microstructure. This might explain why no significant differences have been found in final autogenous shrinkage values using the different filler types.