4.7 Article

Design and evaluation of polyester fiber and SBR latex compound-modified perlite mortar with rubber powder

期刊

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
卷 127, 期 -, 页码 751-761

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.10.060

关键词

Perlite mortar; Rubber powder; Polyester fiber; SBR latex; Mix design; Mechanical performance; Thermal property

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [51308518]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  3. China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) [CUGL150412, G1323531606]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2015M582303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposed a new kind of perlite mortar modified by rubber powder, polyester fiber and SBR latex. The orthogonal experiment design method was employed to study the mix design of this new kind of perlite mortar. The influence of the major mix design parameters on the working performance, mechanical and thermal properties of the perlite mortar was studied. Furthermore, X-ray diffraction, Optical Microscope and Scanning Electron Microscope were employed to study the microstructure and failure mechanism of the perlite mortar. The results indicated that SBR latex/cement ratio had a significant influence on the fluidity and unit dry weight of the perlite mortar. Expanded perlite/cement ratio and rubber powder/cement ratio were the major influence factors on the compressive and flexural strength. Furthermore, the addition of SBR latex and polyester fiber can effectively improve the softening coefficient and frost resistance of the perlite mortar. The compressive strength and thermal conductivity coefficient was nearly linearly proportional to the unit dry weight of the perlite mortar. The internal microscopic matrix of the perlite mortar showed the porous structure and a large amount of unhydrated expanded perlite. SBR latex reinforced the interfacial transition zone between cement hydrates and rubber particles. (C) 2016 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