Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T22:55:14.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bound Water in Cement Pastes and its Significance for Pore Solution Compositions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

H. F. W. Taylor
H. F. W. Taylor*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, University of Aberdeen, Meston Walk, Old Aberdeen AB9 2UE, Scotland, UK
Get access

Abstract

The problem of defining bound water in a cement paste is discussed; a reasonable definition is one that includes interlayer water in C-S-H and AFm phases, structural water in ettringite, and adsorbed water, but not water in micropores or in larger pores. On this basis, structural considerations indicate a value of around 32% on the ignited weight for a fully hydrated paste. ‘Non-evaporable’ water, typically around 22% on the ignited weight at full hydration, cannot be identified with bound water, because dehydration to the state in which only non-evaporable water remains causes major loss of interlayer water and destruction of ettringite. In the interpretation of pore solution data, the definition of bound water, and the value assumed for this quantity, are important, because the ionic concentrations in the pore solution are greatly affected by the volume of free water available to dissolve them. If cement is partially replaced by low calcium fly ash, the quantity of bound water at any given age is substantially reduced. This effect contributes to the relatively low concentrations of alkali metal and hydroxyl ions that are observed in the pore solutions of many portland-fly ash cement pastes.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 85: Symposium M – Microstructural Development During Hydration of Cement , 1986 , 47
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Diamond, S., Cem. Concr. Res. 11, 383 (1981).Google Scholar
2. Copeland, L.E. and Hayes, J.C., ASTM Bull. (194), 79 (1953).Google Scholar
3. Powers, T.C. and Brownyard, T.L., in Studies of the Physical Properties of Hardened Portland Cement Paste (Bulletin 22, Portland Cement Association, Chicago, 1948) pp. 260–263 and 689.Google Scholar
4. Feldman, R.F., Proc. Int. Symp. Chem. Cem., 5th, 1968 3, pp. 53–66.Google Scholar
5. Feldman, R.F., World Cem. Technol. 3, 5 (1972).Google Scholar
6. Daimon, M., Abo-El-Enein, S.A., Hosaka, G., Goto, S. and Kondo, R., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 60, 110 (1977)Google Scholar
7. Harrisson, A.M., Winter, N.B. and Taylor, H.F.W., Proc. Int. Congr. Chem. Cem., 8th, 1986 4, 170–175.Google Scholar
8. Taylor, H.F.W., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 69, 464 (1986).Google Scholar
9. Carpenter, A.B., Chalmers, R.A., Gard, J.A., Speakman, K. and Taylor, H.F.W., Am. Mineral. 51, 56 (1966).Google Scholar
10. Gard, J.A., Taylor, H.F.W., Cliff, G. and Lorimer, G.W., Am. Mineral. 62, 365 (1977).Google Scholar
11. Farmer, V.C., Jeevaratnam, J., Speakman, K. and Taylor, H.F.W., in Symp. On Structure of Portland Cement Paste and Concrete, Special Report 90 (Highway Research Board, Washington, 1966) pp. 291–299.Google Scholar
12. Copeland, L.E., Kantro, D.L. and Verbeck, G., Proc. Int. Symp. Chem. Cem., 4th, 1960, 1, pp. 429–465.Google Scholar
13. Dosch, W., Keller, H. and Strassen, H. zur, Proc. Int. Symp. Chem. Cem., 5th, 1968 2, pp. 72–77.Google Scholar
14. Buttler, F.G., Glasser, L.S. Dent and Taylor, H.F.W., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 42, 121 (1959).Google Scholar
15. Roberts, M.H., Proc. Int. Symp. Chem. Cem., 5th, 1968 2, pp. 104–117.Google Scholar
16. Berman, H.A. and Newman, E.S., Proc. Int. Symp. Chem. Cem., 4th, 1960 1, pp. 247–257.Google Scholar
17. Taylor, H.F.W., Proc. Int. Congr. Chem. Cem., 8th, 1986 1, pp. 82–110.Google Scholar
18. Odler, I. and Dörr, H., Cem. Concr. Res. 9, 239 (1979), and other references therein.Google Scholar
19. Jones, F.E., J. Soc. Chem. Ind. 51, 29 (1940).Google Scholar
20. Taylor, H.F.W., Mohan, K. and Moir, G.K., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 68, 680 (1985).Google Scholar
21. Feldman, R.F., Proc. Int. Congr. Chem. Cem., 8th, 1986 1, pp. 336–356.Google Scholar
22. Glasser, F.P. and Marr, J., Cemento 82, 85 (1985).Google Scholar
23. Kollek, J.J., Varma, S.P. and Zaris, C., Proc. Int. Congr. Chem. Cem., 8th, 1986 4, pp. 183–189.Google Scholar
24. Harrisson, A., Taylor, H.F.W., and Winter, N.B., Cem. Concr. Res. 15, 775 (1985).Google Scholar