Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Aug 3;10(8):900.
doi: 10.3390/ma10080900.

Effect of Calcium Carbonate Fineness on Calcium Sulfoaluminate-Belite Cement

Yeonung Jeong  1 , Craig W Hargis  2 , Sungchul Chun  3 , Juhyuk Moon  4
Affiliations
Free PMC article

Effect of Calcium Carbonate Fineness on Calcium Sulfoaluminate-Belite Cement

Yeonung Jeong et al. Materials (Basel). .
Free PMC article

Abstract

This study investigated the hydration characteristics and strength development of calcium sulfoaluminate-belite (CSAB) cements incorporating calcium carbonate (CC) powders with various particle size distributions and different gypsum amounts. In general, the CSAB hydration was accelerated by the CC powder, but the acceleration and resulting strength improvement were more effective with finer CC powder. Regardless of the fineness of the CC powder, it took part in the hydration of CSAB cement, forming hemicarboaluminate and monocarboaluminate phases. These hydration and nucleation effects compensated for the strength reduction from decreased cementing components (i.e., dilution effect) when finer CC powders were used, while they did not overcome the strength reduction when coarser CC powder was used. On the other hand, increasing the amount of gypsum for a given CC content improved the strength. The strength of CSAB cement had a clear inverse relationship with its total pore volume measured by mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP). Thermodynamic modeling for CSAB cement hydration showed that the use of CC powder increased total volume of solid phases up to 6 wt % at a given amount of gypsum.

Keywords: calcium sulfoaluminate; carbon dioxide reduction; cement hydration; green technology; limestone; sustainable concrete.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Particle size distribution of calcium sulfoaluminate (CSA)-belite clinker and three calcium carbonate powders with different fineness; CC indicates calcium carbonate powder, and F, M, and C indicate the finest, middle, and the coarsest powder, respectively; dv(50) shows the median value of each powder.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(a) Qualitative phase analysis and (b) quantitative X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis with Rietveld refinement for the CSAB clinker.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Isothermal conduction calorimetry of each sample: (a) influence of calcium carbonate powder with different fineness; (b) magnification of dashed-box area in (a); and (c) influence of gypsum content under the presence of calcium carbonate powder.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Strength development of each paste depending on (a) different CC fineness and (b) gypsum content in the presence of CC powder.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Measured X-ray diffraction patterns: E indicates ettringite, Ms monosulfate, Hc hemicarboaluminate, Mc monocarboaluminate, G gypsum, A amorphous aluminum hydroxide [Al(OH)3], Y ye’elimite, C calcite, Ge gehlenite, B beta-C2S, T CaTiO3, F calcium aluminoferrite, and M MgO. (a) CSAB_g0.1_0; (b) CSAB_g0.1_F0.05; (c) CSAB_g0.1_M0.05; (d) CSAB_g0.1_C0.05; (e) CSAB_g0.15_M0.05; (f) CSAB_g0.2_M0.05.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Measured X-ray diffraction patterns: E indicates ettringite, Ms monosulfate, Hc hemicarboaluminate, Mc monocarboaluminate, G gypsum, A amorphous aluminum hydroxide [Al(OH)3], Y ye’elimite, C calcite, Ge gehlenite, B beta-C2S, T CaTiO3, F calcium aluminoferrite, and M MgO. (a) CSAB_g0.1_0; (b) CSAB_g0.1_F0.05; (c) CSAB_g0.1_M0.05; (d) CSAB_g0.1_C0.05; (e) CSAB_g0.15_M0.05; (f) CSAB_g0.2_M0.05.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Results of mercury intrusion porosimetry at 28 days; (a,b) present pore size distributions; (c,d) show cumulative pore volumes.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Results of mercury intrusion porosimetry at 28 days; (a,b) present pore size distributions; (c,d) show cumulative pore volumes.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Relationship between compressive strength and total pore volumes of each paste at 28 days.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Results of modeling cement hydration with different CC contents under conditions of full hydration.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Sharp J.H., Lawrence C.D., Yang R. Calcium sulfoaluminate cements—Low-energy cements, special cements or what? Adv. Cem. Res. 1999;11:3–13. doi: 10.1680/adcr.1999.11.1.3. - DOI
    1. Glasser F.P., Zhang L. High-performance cement matrices based on calcium sulfoaluminate—Belite compositions. Cem. Concr. Res. 2001;31:1881–1886. doi: 10.1016/S0008-8846(01)00649-4. - DOI
    1. Juenger M.C.G., Winnefeld F., Provis J.L., Ideker J.H. Advances in alternative cementitious binders. Cem. Concr. Res. 2011;41:1232–1243. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2010.11.012. - DOI
    1. Winnefeld F., Lothenbach B. Hydration of calcium sulfoaluminate cements—Experimental findings and thermodynamic modelling. Cem. Concr. Res. 2010;40:1239–1247. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.08.014. - DOI
    1. Taylor H.F.W. Cement Chemistry. Thomas Telford; London, UK: 1997.