3.9 Article

Characterizing the Performance of Ternary Concrete Mixtures Involving Slag and Metakaolin

Journal

INFRASTRUCTURES
Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/infrastructures5020014

Keywords

metakaolin; blast furnace slag; ternary; strength; durability; concrete; supplementary cement; pozzolan; mineral admixtures; coe fficient of thermal expansion

Funding

  1. Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) [16-16, 16-30]
  2. GDOT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ternary blends of cementitious materials are investigated. A cement replacement level of 45% is used for all ternary mixtures consisting of 15% metakaolin and 30% slag replacements. Three metakaolin and two blast furnace slag, referred to as 'slag' for short, products commercially available are used to compare performance in ternary blends. A mixture with a 45% fly ash replacement is included to serve as a benchmark for performance. The control mixture contains 422 kg of cement per cubic meter of concrete, and a water-to-cementitious material ratio of 0.43 is used for all mixtures with varying dosages of superplasticizer to retain workability. Mixtures are tested for mechanical properties, durability, and volumetric stability. Mechanical properties include compression, split-cylinder tension, modulus of rupture, and dynamic Young's modulus. Durability measures are comprised of rapid chloride-ion penetrability, sulfate resistance, and alkali-silica reactivity. Finally, the measure of dimensional stability is assessed by conducting drying shrinkage and coefficient of thermal expansion tests. Results indicate that ternary mixtures including metakaolin perform similarly to the control with respect to mechanical strength. It is concluded that ternary blends perform significantly better than both control and fly ash benchmark in tests measuring durability. Furthermore, shrinkage is reduced while the coefficients of thermal expansion are slightly higher than control and the benchmark.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available