4.7 Article

Bond strength of eco-friendly class C fly ash-based thermally cured alkali-activated concrete to portland cement concrete

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 235, 期 -, 页码 404-416

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.268

关键词

Class C fly ash; Alkali activated concrete; Repair; Bond strength; Oven curing; Adhesion

资金

  1. Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT)
  2. Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MoDNR)
  3. Ameren Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sixty percent of existing USA bridges were constructed using conventional concrete (CC), i.e., ordinary Portland cement (OPC)-based concrete. Due to aging and changes in standards, many of these bridges require structural repair. To develop engineering-sound repairs, the bond strength between the repair material and existing structure needs to be investigated. This study investigated the bond strength between CC and alkali-activated concrete (AAC) as a repair material using slant shear and pull-off tests. The AACs were synthesized using five different class C fly ashes with different chemical compositions and physical properties. The AAC was cured at an elevated temperature of 158 degrees F for 24 h. The bond interface surface is subjected to different types of stresses during the service life of the repaired structure. Therefore, slant shear and pull-off tests were performed to assess the bond strength between CC and AAC bond surfaces subjected to compression-shear and direct tension, respectively. For the slant shear, three inclination interface angles of 45 degrees, 33.75, and 22.5 degrees were investigated. For the pull-off test, a bonding agent and sandblasting were investigated. The slant shear results displayed that the adhesion coefficient and the internal friction angle of the AAC repair ranged from 4.96 to 6.94 psi and 24 degrees to 35 degrees, respectively. Furthermore, while the sandblasting surface treatment improved the bond strength, the bonding agent did not. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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