4.6 Article

Report of RILEM TC 267-TRM phase 3: validation of the R3 reactivity test across a wide range of materials

期刊

MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
卷 55, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1617/s11527-022-01947-3

关键词

Supplementary cementitious materials; Reactivity test; Heat release; Bound water; Compressive strength

资金

  1. EPFL Lausanne
  2. Slovenian Research Agency [P2-0273]
  3. Engineering and Physical Science Research (EPSRC) Council [EP/R001642/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The R-3 test was applied to validate the chemical reactivity of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). The study found a strong correlation between cumulative heat release and bound water determined by the R-3 test method. While conventional SCMs followed a similar trend in mortar compressive strength development, highly reactive calcined kaolinitic clays were an exception. The study suggests proposing reactivity threshold values for classification of SCMs based on the R-3 test results.
RILEM TC 267 TRM- Tests for Reactivity of Supplementary Cementitious Materials recommends the Rapid Reliable Relevant (R-3) test as a method for determining the chemical reactivity of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) in Portland cement blends. In this paper, the R-3 test was applied to 52 materials from a wide range of conventional and alternative SCMs with the aim to validate such test. An excellent correlation was found between the cumulative heat release and the bound water determined following the R-3 test method. Comparison of the R-3 test results to mortar compressive strength development showed that all conventional SCMs (e.g. blast furnace slag and fly ashes) followed the same trend, with the notable exception of very reactive calcined kaolinitic clays. It is discussed, through an in-depth statistical regression analysis of the R-3 reactivity test results and the 28 days relative compressive strengths, how reactivity threshold values for classification of the chemical reactivity of SCMs could be proposed based on the R-3 test results.

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