4.7 Article

Experimental study on strength and durability of lightweight aggregate concrete containing silica fume

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 114, Issue -, Pages 517-527

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.165

Keywords

Lightweight aggregate; High strength concrete; Durability; Chloride penetration; Freeze-thaw

Funding

  1. Techology Innovation Program - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MI, Korea) [10042556]
  2. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10042556] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the mechanical property and durability performance of high strength lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) with silica fume for 91 days were presented. LWACs were designed to have the design compressive strength of 60 MPa at 28 days and the oven-dry density below 1900 kg/m(3). Nine mixtures with three aggregate types and silica fume replacement ratio of 0%, 3.5% and 7.0% by cement weight were prepared. The splitting tensile strength, the compressive strength and the modulus of elasticity tests were conducted at 7 days, 28 days, 56 days and 91 days. The chloride penetration resistance tests were done at 28 days, 56 days and 91 days. The chloride diffusion coefficient based on the measurement of chloride penetration depth was also measured at 7 days, 14 days, 28 days, 56 days and 91 days. The rapid freeze-thaw cycling tests were conducted and the relative dynamic modulus was evaluated up to 300 cycles. The results indicate that the durability against chemical deterioration for LWAC incorporated to silica fume depends on the compositions of hardened cement pastes in concretes, while the durability against physical attack depends on the types of aggregates. (C) 2016 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