4.7 Article

Evaluation of static segregation of cemented gangue-fly ash backfill material using electrical resistivity method

Journal

MEASUREMENT
Volume 154, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.107483

Keywords

Cemented gangue-fly ash backfill material; Static segregation; Electrical resistivity method; Bleeding; Image analysis

Funding

  1. Joint Funds of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, China [U1710258, U1810120]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China, China [51574172, 51804208]
  3. Key Technologies Research and Development Coal-Based Program of Shanxi Province, China [MQ2014-12]
  4. Key Research and Development Program (social development) of Shanxi Province, China [201803D31044]
  5. Program for Innovative Talents of Science and Technology in Shanxi Province, China [201605D211003]
  6. Research Fund of The State Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safe Mining, CUMT, China [SKLCRSM18KF016]
  7. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, China [2018M632423]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Static segregation of a cemented gangue-fly ash backfill material (CGFBM) presents a harmful impact on its mechanical and pipeline transportation performances. To evaluate the static segregation of a CGFBM in real time, electrical resistivity (ER) method is proposed by monitoring the ER change at different depths. The static stabilities of various mixtures with different mass concentrations of 74%, 76%, 78%, 80%, and 82% are evaluated in terms of the ER characteristics and derived segregation index (SI). Results showed that: for mixtures with relatively low mass concentrations (74% and 76%), the SI gradually decreases with increasing elapsed time after casting. 0.85 is the critical value. The CGFBM with a SI smaller and larger than 0.85 can be considered to have a low and high stability, respectively. The feasibility of the ER method is verified by bleeding test and image analysis method. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available