4.7 Article

Sulfuric acid-resistance performances of magnesium phosphate cements: Macro-properties, mineralogy and microstructure evolutions

期刊

CEMENT AND CONCRETE RESEARCH
卷 157, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2022.106830

关键词

Magnesium phosphate cement; Acid; Amorphization; Hydration

资金

  1. Shandong Natural Science Foundation [ZR2020YQ33]
  2. Education Department of Shandong Province [2019GGX102077]
  3. Science and Technology Innovation Support Plan for Young Researchers in Institutes of Higher Education in Shandong [2019KJA017]
  4. Case-by-Case Project for Top Outstanding Talents of Jinan
  5. Taishan Scholars Program [ts201712048]
  6. 111 Project of International Corporation on Advanced Cement based Materials [D17001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The acid resistance performance of magnesium phosphate cements is of great importance and this study found that magnesium ammonium phosphate cement has better resistance to sulfuric acid than magnesium potassium phosphate cement.
The acid resistance performance of magnesium phosphate cements (MPCs) are greatly concerned but poorly understood among the re-surging research efforts. Effects of sulfuric acidity (pH = 2-7) on the properties of magnesium ammonium phosphate cement (MAPC) and magnesium potassium phosphate cement (MKPC) were investigated. Results showed that MKPC was more sulfuric acid-sensitive than MAPC, and its compressive strength retention decreased to 67.5% at 28 days at pH = 2, during which process the amorphization of struviteK crystal was observed. Comparable or even higher strength was observed in MAPC cured in acids with pH higher than 2. Although the hydration degree of both MPCs increased in these liquid environments and the amorphization process was suppressed, the adverse effects introduced by the loss of NH4/K in struvite/struvite-K, change in morphology, or increase in the porosity (esp. MKPC) may outweigh the positive increase in hydration, leading to the reduction in strength.

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