EFFECTS OF DEICING SALTS ON THE DURABILITY OF CONCRETE INCORPORATING SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The durability of concrete mixtures incorporating one of two supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), slag cement or Class C fly ash, exposed to sodium chloride (NaCl), calcium chloride (CaCl2), or magnesium chloride (MgCl2) is evaluated based on damage due to wetting and drying and scaling, with the goal of determining appropriate replacement levels of portland cement using these SCMs. The mixtures had water-to-cementitious material ratios of 0.38 and 0.44 and SCM percentage replacements of portland cement of 0%, 20%, 35%, and 50% by volume. Fourteen concrete mixtures (204 specimens) were cast to evaluate the damage to concrete subjected to 300 cycles of wetting and drying while exposed to solutions of one of the three deicing salts or deionized water in which the temperature of the specimens ranged from 39.2 ºF (4 ºC) during the wetting cycle to 73 ± 3 ºF (23 ± 2 ºC) during the drying cycle. Of special interest were the effects of CaCl2 and MgCl2, which result in the formation of calcium oxychloride. Durability was evaluated based on the average relative dynamic modulus of elasticity and the nature of physical damage, if any. Mixtures subjected to CaCl2 or MgCl2 that exhibit no spalling at test completion are considered to be durable. Ten concrete mixtures (156 specimens) were cast with curing periods of 14 or 28 days to investigate scaling over 56 cycles in accordance with Quebec test BNQ NQ 2621-900 using NaCl or CaCl2. Mixtures are considered durable if the average cumulative mass losses are less than the BNQ NQ 2621-900 failure limit of 0.10 lb/ft2. The results show that wetting and drying with deionized water or an NaCl solution does not cause deterioration of concrete. Exposure to CaCl2 and MgCl2, however, both of which result in the formation of calcium oxychloride, causes physical damage and a reduction in the dynamic modulus of concrete with portland cement as the only binder, with CaCl2 being the more deleterious of the two. A partial replacement of portland cement with either slag cement or Class C fly ash is effective in producing durable concrete exposed to CaCl2 or MgCl2. Using a 20% replacement of portland cement with an SCM, however, is not sufficient to produce durable concrete under conditions that result in the formation of calcium oxychloride, while replacing 35% or 50% of the portland cement with one of the SCMs used in this study is. The results, also, show that using slag cement or Class C fly ash as a replacement of portland cement results in an increase in scaling compared to concrete with portland cement as the only binder. For mixtures with portland cement as the only binder and with a 20% slag cement replacement of portland cement, CaCl2 causes somewhat more scaling than NaCl. For mixtures with a replacement percentage using either SCM of 35%, NaCl causes more scaling than CaCl2. In all cases, however, the scaling mass losses for mixtures with 35% SCM replacements of portland cement were below the BNQ NQ 2621-900 failure limit. At 50% volume replacements, the increase in scaling is noticeably higher than with 20% and 35% replacements, especially for mixtures exposed to NaCl. The mass losses for mixtures with a 50% SCM replacement of portland cement exposed to NaCl exceeded the BNQ NQ 2621-900 failure limit. Extending the curing period from 14 to 28 days has no measurable effect on the scaling for most concrete mixtures in the study. Based on the findings of the wetting and drying and scaling tests, a partial replacement of portland cement with either slag cement or Class C fly ash is essential to produce durable concrete that will be subjected to the deicing salts CaCl2 or MgCl2 that cause the formation of calcium oxychloride. Using a 20% volume replacement of portland cement is not adequate, while a 35% volume replacement is. Replacement percentages above 35%, however, are not recommended when the deicing salt NaCl may be used because of increasingly poor scaling resistance with increasing slag cement and Class C fly ash replacement levels.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».