4.6 Article

Modification Effects of Carbon Nanotube Dispersion on the Mechanical Properties, Pore Structure, and Microstructure of Cement Mortar

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma13051101

关键词

carbon nanotubes; cement; mechanical properties; pore structure; microstructure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51309203, 51678534, 51879244]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin China, Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research [IWHR-SKL-201512]
  3. Opening Foundation of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute of China [CKWV2017517/KY]
  4. Program for Innovative Research Team (in Science and Technology) at the University of Henan Province [20IRTSTHN009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are very effective in improving the performance of cement-based materials. Mechanical properties and pore structure were investigated for cement mortar with CNTs. Meanwhile, the composite morphology of CNT-cement material and the evolution of hydration products were observed by scanning electron microscope (SEM), and the quantitative relationship between mechanical properties and pore structure was analyzed. The results indicated that the strength of mortar increased with the addition of 0.05% CNTs and decreased when the fraction of CNTs increased to 0.5%. The porosity of mortar with dispersed CNTs increased significantly, as these pores may be introduced by the dispersant. The quantitative relationship between porosity and strength proved that the increased porosity is the reason for the decreased strength of mortar with 0.5% CNT content, while mortar matrix strength with 0.05% and 0.5% CNTs increased by 44.03% and 71.18%, respectively. SEM images show that CNTs are dispersed uniformly in the mortar without obvious agglomeration and that the CNTs and hydration products form a meshwork structure, which is the mechanism by which CNTs can enhance the strength of the cement matrix.

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