4.6 Article

Mechanical and thermal characterisation of geopolymers based on silicate-activated metakaolin/slag blends

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 46, 期 16, 页码 5477-5486

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10853-011-5490-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. Universidad del Valle (Colombia)
  2. Instituto Colombiano para el Desarrollo de la Ciencia y Tecnologia Francisco Jose de Caldas (COLCIENCIAS)
  3. Center of Excellence of Novel Materials (CENM)
  4. Australian Research Council (ARC)
  5. Particulate Fluids Processing Centre
  6. Special Research Centre of the ARC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article assesses the effect of mix design parameters on the compressive strength and thermal performance of alkali silicate-activated blends of metakaolin (MK) and granulated blast furnace slag (GBFS). A strong interrelationship between the effects of activator composition and the GBFS/(GBFS + MK) ratio is identified through statistical analysis of compressive strength data. Pastes formulated with higher SiO2/Al2O3 molar ratios show improvements in mechanical strength with increasing GBFS addition, associated with the formation of a structure comprising coexisting aluminosilicate 'geopolymer' gel and Ca-rich Al-substituted silicate hydrate (C-(A)-S-H) reaction products. The inclusion of GBFS in MK-based geopolymers seems also to improve their performance when exposed to high temperatures, as higher residual compressive strengths are reported for these mixtures compared to solely MK-based systems. Only slight differences in shrinkage behaviour are observed at temperatures of up to 600 A degrees C with the inclusion of GBFS; however, slag-blended pastes exhibit enhanced stability at temperatures exceeding 800 A degrees C, as no variation in the compressive strength and no additional shrinkage are identified. These results suggest that nanostructural modifications are induced in the gel by the inclusion of GBFS into MK-based geopolymers, improving the overall performance of these materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据