Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, 51:125 | Cite as

Performance of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) with various kaolinite contents with respect to chloride transport

  • Hamed Maraghechi
  • Francois Avet
  • Hong Wong
  • Hadi Kamyab
  • Karen Scrivener
50 years of Materials and Structures
  • 316 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. 50 years of Materials and Structures

Abstract

The durability of mortar and paste mixtures with respect to chloride ion ingress was investigated for binary blends of Portland Cement Calcined Clay, and ternary systems of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3). Five clays from various sources with different kaolinite content (17–95%) were studied. The main factor controlling the diffusivity of LC3 systems was found to be the kaolinite content of the clay. Resistance to chloride ingress increased to intermediate levels of kaolinite content and then stabilized. An intermediate kaolinite content of around 50% resulted in two orders of magnitude reduction in diffusivity compared to PC, indicating that the use of high grade (expensive) clays is not necessary to obtain good durability. The chloride binding capacity and distribution of bound chloride between Friedel’s salt and C–A–S–H were quantified for the different systems at fixed water to binder ratio of 0.5. The chloride binding capacity appeared to be a minor factor compared to the porosity refinement in the improved durability of LC3 systems.

Keywords

Calcined clay Limestone Kaolinite Chloride diffusion Phase assemblage Supplementary cementitious materials 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (contract 81026665) for the work presented in this paper. We thank Dr. Fatmawati Abdul Wahid for her assistance with the μ-XRF analysis.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exists.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Scrivener K, John VM, Gartner EM (2016) Eco-efficient cements: Potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement-based materials industry. UNEP (United Nations Environment ProgramGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Metz BD, Davidson O, Bosch P, Meyer L (2007) Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in: C.U. Press (Ed.)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Global Soil Regions (2005) US Department of Agriculture—Natural Resources Conservations ServiceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scrivener K, Favier A (Eds.) (2015) Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martirena F, Favier A, Scrivener K (2018) Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Avet F, Snellings R, Alujas Diaz A, Haha MB, Scrivener K (2016) Development of a new rapid, relevant and reliable (R3) test method to evaluate the pozzolanic reactivity of calcined kaolinitic clays. Cem Concr Res 85:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Antoni M, Rossen J, Martirena F, Scrivener K (2012) Cement substitution by a combination of metakaolin and limestone. Cem Concr Res 42:1579–1589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alujas A, Fernández R, Quintana R, Scrivener KL, Martirena F (2015) Pozzolanic reactivity of low grade kaolinitic clays: Influence of calcination temperature and impact of calcination products on OPC hydration. Appl Clay Sci 108:94–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fernandez R, Martirena F, Scrivener KL (2011) The origin of the pozzolanic activity of calcined clay minerals: a comparison between kaolinite, illite and montmorillonite. Cem Concr Res 41:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loser R, Lothenbach B, Leemann A, Tuchschmid M (2010) Chloride resistance of concrete and its binding capacity—comparison between experimental results and thermodynamic modeling. Cement Concr Compos 32:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arya C, Xu Y (1995) Effect of cement type on chloride binding and corrosion of steel in concrete. Cem Concr Res 25:893–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dhir RK, El-Mohr MAK, Dyer TD (1996) Chloride binding in GGBS concrete. Cem Concr Res 26:1767–1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Weerdt K, Colombo A, Coppola L, Justnes H, Geiker MR (2015) Impact of the associated cation on chloride binding of Portland cement paste. Cem Concr Res 68:196–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lothenbach B, Le Saout G, Gallucci E, Scrivener K (2008) Influence of limestone on the hydration of Portland cements. Cem Concr Res 38:848–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bonavetti VL, Rahhal VF, Irassar EF (2001) Studies on the carboaluminate formation in limestone filler-blended cements. Cem Concr Res 31:853–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thomas MDA, Hooton RD, Scott A, Zibara H (2012) The effect of supplementary cementitious materials on chloride binding in hardened cement paste. Cem Concr Res 42:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Elakneswaran Y, Nawa T, Kurumisawa K (2009) Electrokinetic potential of hydrated cement in relation to adsorption of chlorides. Cem Concr Res 39:340–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Weerdt K, Orsáková D, Geiker MR (2014) The impact of sulphate and magnesium on chloride binding in Portland cement paste. Cem Concr Res 65:30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zibara H, Hooton RD, Thomas MDA, Stanish K (2008) Influence of the C/S and C/A ratios of hydration products on the chloride ion binding capacity of lime-SF and lime-MK mixtures. Cem Concr Res 38:422–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dai ZT, Thuan T, Skibsted J (2014) Aluminum Incorporation in the C–S–H Phase of White Portland Cement-Metakaolin Blends Studied by 27Al and 29Si MAS NMR Spectroscopy. J Am Ceram Soc 97:2662–2671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Souri A, Kazemi-Kamyab H, Snellings R, Naghizadeh R, Golestani-Fard F, Scrivener K (2015) Pozzolanic activity of mechanochemically and thermally activated kaolins in cement. Cem Concr Res 77:47–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Weerdt K, Colombo A, Coppola L, Justnes H, Geiker MR (2015) Impact of the associated cation on chloride binding of Portland cement paste. Cem Concr Res 68:196–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shi Z, Geiker MR, Lothenbach B, De Weerdt K, Garzon SF, Enemark-Rasmussen K, Skibsted J (2017) Friedel’s salt profiles from thermogravimetric analysis and thermodynamic modelling of Portland cement-based mortars exposed to sodium chloride. Cem Concr Compos 78:73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Badogiannis E, Aggeli E, Papadakis VG, Tsivilis S (2015) Evaluation of chloride-penetration resistance of metakaolin concrete by means of a diffusion e Binding model and of the k-value concept. Cement Concr Compos 63:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shekarchi M, Bonakdar A, Bakhshi M, Mirdamadi A, Mobasher B (2010) Transport properties in metakaolin blended concrete. Constr Build Mater 24:2217–2223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boddy A, Hooton RD, Gruber KA (2001) Long-term testing of the chloride-penetration resistance of concrete containing high-reactivity metakaolin. Cem Concr Res 31(5):759–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shi Z, Geiker MR, DeWeerdt K, Østnor TA, Lothenbach B, Winnefeld F, Skibsted J (2017) Role of calcium on chloride binding in hydrated Portland cement–metakaolin–limestone blends. Cem Concr Res 95:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Avet F, Snellings R, Alujas Diaz A, Haha MB, Scrivener K (2016) Development of a new rapid, relevant and reliable (R3) test method to evaluate the pozzolanic reactivity of calcined kaolinitic clays. Cem Concr Res 85:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moradllo MK, Sudbrink B, Hu Q, Aboustait M, Tabb B, Ley MT, Davis JM (2017) Using micro X-ray fluorescence to image chloride profiles in concrete. Cem Concr Res 92:128–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    F. Avet, Ph.D. Thesis, EPFL 2017Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rossen JE, Scrivener KL (2017) Optimization of SEM-EDS to determine the C–A–S–H composition in matured cement paste samples. Mater Charact 123:294–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Avet F, Scrivener K (2018) Investigation of the calcined kaolinite content on the hydration of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3). Cem Concr Res 107:124–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Balonis M, Lothenbach B, Le Saout G, Glasser FP (2010) Impact of chloride on the mineralogy of hydrated Portland cement systems. Cem Concr Res 40:1009–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Avet F, Scrivener K (2018) Investigation of the calcined kaolinite content on the hydration of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3). Cem Concr Res 107:124–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Construction MaterialsEPFL STI IMX LMCLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringImperial College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Sustainable Materials Management UnitFlemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO NV)MolBelgium

Personalised recommendations