Design and evaluation of high-volume fly ash (HVFA) concrete mixes, report A : evaluation of HVFA cementitious paste and concrete mixtures.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Design and evaluation of high-volume fly ash (HVFA) concrete mixes, report A : evaluation of HVFA cementitious paste and concrete mixtures.

Filetype[PDF-5.53 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
  • English

  • Details:

    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • Geographical Coverage:
    • NTL Classification:
      NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Pavement Management and Performance ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Design ;
    • Abstract:
      In the Paste Screening Study, 25 combinations of five Type I/II portland cements

      and five Class C fly ashes commonly used in Missouri were tested in paste form with no

      chemical or powder additives. Testing procedures included semi-adiabatic calorimetry,

      Vicat setting time, miniature slump, and compressive strength at one and 28 days. The

      two most reactive and two least reactive combinations (defined by one day strengths)

      were further evaluated in the Paste Main Effects Study. Eighty mixtures were examined.

      In the Paste Main Effects Study, the effects of two levels each of WR/HRWR,

      gypsum, calcium hydroxide (lime), rapid set cement (RSC), and gypsum-lime, and

      gypsum-RSC were determined. Except for the WR/HRWR dosage level experiment, all

      other mixtures contained a low WR/HRWR dosage. Except for the gypsum level

      experiment, all other mixtures contained 4% gypsum. The lime levels were 5 and 10%

      and the RSC levels were 10 and 20%. All percentages are by mass of fly ash. Sixty-four

      mixtures were examined.

      The objective of the Concrete Properties Study was to scale up from paste to

      concrete the most promising powder additive combinations and then evaluate the

      mixtures in terms of plastic and hardened properties. Thus the mixture matrix included

      ordinary portland cement (OPC)-fly ash blends at two levels (same as in the Paste Main

      Effects Study) and fly ash at three levels (zero, 50 and 70%). WR dosage (nominal

      dosage), gypsum content (4%), lime content (10%), and RSC content (20%) were held

      constant. Ten concrete mixtures were evaluated.

      At the 50% fly ash level, one day strengths were low no matter which powder

      additives was used, but good strengths were achieved by day 3. At the 70% fly ash level, the concrete was weaker than at zero and 50% fly ash, but reasonable strengths were

      reached at 28 days. At 50% fly ash, abrasion resistance was somewhat lower. At 70% the

      effect was much worse. In regard to drying shrinkage, it appears that HVFA mixtures

      shrink less than their OPC counterparts. In a comparison to OPC mixtures, rapid chloride

      permeability (RCP) was lower for 50% fly ash mixtures, but 70% fly ash mixtures are

      more permeable. All HVFA mixtures had greater freeze-thaw Durability Factors than the

      OPC mixtures, and were at 93 or above. However, all fly ash mixtures did poorly in

      regard to salt scaling. Reaction time (calorimeter curve time, setting time, stiffening time)

      varied as a function of characteristics of the OPC and fly ash in conjunction with each

      other, type and level of powder additives used, dosage of WR/HRWR, and the type of

      test method used for evaluation.

    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.21