Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Presentasi "Alternative Binder For Concrete Other Than Cement" by Jaine SK Yeung, Hongkong Concrete Institute
Presentasi "Alternative Binder For Concrete Other Than Cement" by Jaine SK Yeung, Hongkong Concrete Institute
ders for
Concrete Other Than
Cement
Jaime SK Yeung
What is Concrete?
invented?
invented?
~ 800 BC
The Greeks used lime mortars that
were much harder than later
Roman mortars.
~ 300 BC
The Babylonians
Babylonians and Assyrians
used bitumen to bind stones and
bricks together
together.
Hong Kong Concrete Institute www.hongkongci.org
~ 299 BC to 476 AD
The Romans used pozzolana
cement ffrom Pozzuoli
P li, Ital
t ly near
Mt. Vesuvius to build many famous
R
Roman sttructures.
t They
Th used d
broken bricks and stone
aggregatest embeddb dded in i a mixture
i t
of lime putty with brick dust or
vollcaniic ash b
by th
the Romans.
• 1774
• John Smeaton discovered that
combining quicklime with other
materials created an extremely hard
material that could be used to bind
together other materials.
1793
John Smeaton found that the
calcination of limestone containing
clay produced a lime that hardened
under water (hydraulic lime).
1796
• An Englishman,
Englishman James Parker,
Parker
patented a natural hydraulic
cement by calcining nodules of
impure limestone containing clay,
called Parker's
Parker s Cement or Roman
Cement.
Emitter
Common estimation on the CO2 emission from cement
production: 0.6 – 1 T of CO2 per 1 T of cement
production.
In China
China, the statistics in 2005 for the CO2 emission
from cement production:
0.815 T of CO2 per 1 T of cement production
0.39 T of CO2 is from the burninggof fossil fuel (coal))and
0.415 T is from the decomposition of raw material
(CaCO3 Heat CaO + CO2)
(MgCO3 Heat MgO + CO2)
CaO + H2O
Ca(OH) 2
~ 80% of cement.
Ca(OH) 2 + CO2
CaCO3 + H2O
emission
i i
emission
Production
P d ti process off C
Calcium
l i
Sulfate Hemihydrate (Gypsum
bind
der)):
Calcium Sulfate Dihydrate crushed
Calcined at dried
ground
120 - 150℃
emission
CO2 emissi
i ion from energy
consumption for calcination: 120 –
150oC VVs 1450oC (10% off cement)
t)
CO2 emission from electricity
consumption for grinding process
(similar)
CO2 emission due to chemical
Finding
gs from Test Results Using
g
Lime as Binder in Concrete
Less water requirement
requirement to attain the
same workability than that of plain OPC
mix
Lime also provides the required alkaline
environment (Ca(OH)2) to activate the
pozzollanic properti
ties off PFA in sttrength
th
development
When works with
with OPC
OPC in the same
same mix,
mix
the stiffening time (visual check) is only
slightly prolonged (similar to PFA)
Finding
gs from Test Results Using
g
Lime as Binder in Concrete
Works well with ordinary water reducing
retarding admixtures for OPC mixes
Hydration process takes much longer time
than OPC mixes (Ca(OH)2 takes up CO2 to form
CaCO3)
Att i reasonable
Attain bl compressive i strength
t th att 28-
28
day and 56-day (still gains strength after 56-
day)
Works with PFA even with a small quantity of
lime (much longer stiffening time)
Finding
gs from Test Results Using
g
Gypsum as Binder in Concrete
Ordinary water reducing agent for OPC mixes
still works with Gypsum but special retarder is
required to maintain adequate workable time
time
More water is required than lime concrete for
achieving similar workability
Wh
When targeting
t ti att similar
i il workability,
k bilit the
th W/B
ratio is higher for Gypsum Concrete than Lime
concrete
No early strength was tested but it could be
noticed that the demoulding time for Gypsum
Concrete was shorter than Lime Concrete
Finding
gs from Test Results Using
g
Gypsum as Binder in Concrete
Gypsum iis close
G l to
t neutral
t l itself
it lf and
d therefore
th f
does not provide an alkaline environment for the
pozzolanic reaction of PFA. Therefore, it does
nott workk wellll with
ith PFA allone.
A triple blend binder design (OPC-Gypsum-PFA)
has a lower 7-day ystren gth than a OPC-Gypypsum
mix design but the 28-day strengths of both
designs are similar
In theory, gypsum is much more stable than OPC
in volume change and is therefore expected to
have a lower drying shrinkage value (not tested
this time) for a similar W/B ratio
to
Replace Cement in Part or in Whole
Non structural elements when used as the sole
binder in concrete
Co-binders
Co binders in concrete for light duty structural
elements
Co-binders in concrete to modify the
p perties
prop
of the resulted concrete (rheology
gy
modifier: e.g. reduce drying shrinkage,
E
Excavated
t d ciircumfference for tunnell
Tunnel
Lime mortar
TBM front shield filling up the Tunnel segment
cavity
studies
only wh
onl hen talk
talk
about concrete!
much!