Abstract
Siliceous coal bottom ash is a residue originated in thermo-electrical power stations as a result of the hard coal combustion. It is expected that some characteristics of the coal bottom ash would be similar to those of the coal fly ash formed together in the same boiler. Coal bottom ash has a larger size than coal fly ash. Then, the first one was ground to achieve a particle size similar to the cement size. Therefore, to assess the sulphate resistance of cement-based materials made of ground coal bottom ash, sixteen Portland cement mixes were prepared by combining a cement CEM I 42.5 N according to the European standard EN 197-1:2011, a ground coal bottom ash and a coal fly ash. Both ashes were formed in the same boiler. The expansion measurements are considered to be an adequate parameter to assess damage due to sulphate attack of continuously submerged specimens. This procedure is the basis of the American standard ASTM C-1012/C1012 to evaluate the resistance of Portland cement and other cementitious materials to sulphate attack wherein the expansion measurements are taken with a standardized length comparator along the time. In this research program, the extent of sulphate attack was quantified by the percentage expansion of slender bars submerged in 5% sodium sulphate solution according to the ASTM C-1012 standard. This standard specifies an expansion limit of 0.01% for ordinary Portland cements CEM I and 0.035% for blended cements after a period of one year of exposure. The Portland cement CEM I 42.5 N made without ashes exhibited the largest expansion at 330 days (0.09%); whereas a cement with 10% of coal ash, CEM II/A-V, the expansion was much lower (0.03%) for both types of ashes. The expansion decreases when the ash content increases. In this property, no difference was found between ground coal bottom ash and coal fly ash provided by the same thermo-electrical power station.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Veronelli DJE, Calleja J (1980) Nuevos puntos de vista sobre el atoque de sulfatos y cloruros alcalinos al hormigón. Mater Construcc 180:5–13
Collepardi M (2003) A state-of-the-art review on delayed ettringite attack on concrete. Cem Concr Compos 25:401–407
Skalny J, Pierce JS (1999) Sulfate attack issues: an overview. In: Marchand J, Skalny JP (eds) Materials science of concrete: sulfate attack mechanisms. American Ceramic Society, Westerville, OH, pp 49–63
ACI 201.2R-01 (2001) Guide to durable concrete. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA
Neville AM (2004) The confused world of sulfate attack on concrete. Cem Concr Res 34:1275–1296
Ramyar K, Inan G (2007) Sodium sulfate attack on plain and blended cements. Build Environ 42:1368–1372
Santhanam M, Cohen MD, Olek J (2003) Effects of gypsum formation on the performance of cement mortars during external sulfate attack. Cem Concr Res 33:325–332
ASTM C1012/C1012M (2013) Standard test method for length change of hydraulic-cement mortars exposed to a sulfate solution. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM C 452 (2006) Standard test method for potential expansion of Portland-cement mortars exposed to sulfate. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
Sanjuán MA, Argiz C (2012) The new European standard on common cements specifications EN 197-1:2011. Mater Construcc 62:425–430
EN 196-1 (2016) Methods of testing cement—Part 1: determination of strength. CEN, Brussels, Belgium
Argiz C, Menéndez E, Sanjuán MA (2013) Effect of mixes made of coal bottom ash and fly ash on the mechanical strength and porosity of Portland cement. Mater Construcc 309:49–64
Cohen DM, Mather B (1991) Sulfate attack on concrete—research needs. ACI Mater J 1:62–69
Biczok I (1967) Concrete corrosion and concrete protection. Chemical Publishing Company, New York
Santhanam M, Cohen MD, Olek J (2001) Sulfate attack research—whither now? Cem Concr Res 31:845–851
Wong GS, Poole T (1988) Sulfate resistance of mortars using Portland cement and blends of Portland cement and pozzolan or slag. Technical report SL-88-34. US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC
Steiger M (2005) Crystal growth in porous materials-II: influence of crystal size on the crystallization. J Cryst Growth 282(3–4):470–481
Haynes H (2002) Sulfate attack on concrete: laboratory versus field experience. Concr Int 24(7):64–70
Tikalsky PJ, Carrasquillo RL, Snow PG (1990) Sulfate resistance of concrete containing fly ash. In: Proceedings of the G.M. Idorn international symposium on durability of concrete, ACI SP-131, pp 255–265
Hewlett PC (2004) LEA’S chemistry of cement and concrete, 4th edn. Elsevier Ltd., Oxford
Prasad J, Jain DK, Ahuja AK (2006) Factors influencing the sulphate resistance of cement concrete and mortar. Asian J Civil Eng (Buil & Hous) 7(3):259–268
Monteiro PJM (2006) Scaling and saturation laws for the expansion of concrete exposed to sulfate attack. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103(31):11467–11472
Skalny J, Marchand J, Odler I (2002) Sulfate attack on concrete. Modern concrete technology series. Spon Press, London
Neville AM (1996) Properties of concrete, 4th edn. Wiley, New York, USA
Tian B, Cohen MD (2000) Does gypsum formation during sulfate attack on concrete lead to expansion? Cem Concr Res 30:117–123
Torii K, Taniguchi K, Kawamura M (1995) Sulfate resistance of high fly ash content concrete. Cem Concr Res 25(4):759–768
Al-Dulaijan Salah U, Maslehuddin M, Al-Zahrani MM (2003) Sulfate resistance of plain and blended cements exposed to varying concentrations of sodium sulfate. Cem Concr Compos 25(4–5):429–437
Chindaprasirt P, Kanchanda P, Sathonsaowaphak A, Cao HT (2007) Sulfate resistance of blended cements containing fly ash and rice husk ash. Constr Buil Mater 21(6):1356–1361
Irassar EF (1990) Sulphate resistance of blended cements: prediction and relation with flexural strength. Cem Concr Res 20(1):209–218
Mangat PS, El-Khatib JM (1992) Influence of initial curing on sulfate resistance of blended cement mortars. Cem Concr Res 22(6):1089–1100
Sercale R, Gioffi R, de Vito B, Frigione G, Zenone F (1997) Sulphate attack on carbonated and uncarbonated Portland and blended cement mortars. In: Proceedings of the 10th international congress on the chemistry of cements, Gothenburg, Sweden, Paper 4iv017
Aye T, Oguchi C (2011) Resistance of plain and blended cement mortars exposed to severe sulfate attacks. Constr Buil Mater 25:2988–2996
Zanqun L, Dehua D, De Schutter G, Zhiwu Y (2011) Micro-analysis of “salt weathering” on cement paste. Cem Concr Compo 33(1):179–191
Stark D (2002) Performance of concrete in sulfate environments, vol RD129. Portland Cement Association
Nobst P, Stark J (2003) Investigations on the influence of cement type on thaumasite formation. Cem Concr Compos 25(8):899–906
Dunstan ER Jr (1980) A possible method for identifying fly ashes that will improve sulfate resistance. Cem Concr Aggregates 2(1):20–30
Mehta PK (1986) Effect of fly ash composition on sulfate resistance of cements. ACI Mater J 83(6):994–1000
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 RILEM
About this paper
Cite this paper
Menéndez, E., Argiz, C., Sanjuán, M.A. (2020). Evolution of Damage Due to Sulphate Attack in Cement Mortar with and Without Ground Coal Bottom Ash. In: Menéndez, E., Baroghel-Bouny, V. (eds) External Sulphate Attack – Field Aspects and Lab Tests. RILEM Bookseries, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20331-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20331-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-20330-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-20331-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)