Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:36:14.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Silica Fume, Bond Strength, and the Compressive Strength of Mortar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

David Darwin ,
Shen Zhenjia  and
Shraddhakar Harsh
David Darwin
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045
Shen Zhenjia
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045
Shraddhakar Harsh
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045
Get access

Abstract

The strength and strain-rate sensitivity of cement paste and mortar is studied as a function of water-cementitious material ratio (W/C) and silica fume content. W/C's of 0.30 and 0.35 are used for materials without silica fume, while W/C's ranging from 0.336 to 0.436 are used for material containing silica fume. The volume fractions of cement paste matrix and sand are held at 63 and 37 percent, respectively, for all mortars. Strain rates of 30, 3000, and 300,000 microstrain per second are used. The results indicate that materials with silica fume are less strain-rate sensitive of than materials without silica fume. The replacement of cement by silica fume appears to (1) reduce rather than increase the bond strength between cement paste and sand and (2) increase the compressive strength of mortar primarily by increasing the strength of the cement paste matrix.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 114: Symposium R – Bonding in Cementitious Composites , 1987 , 105
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Mehta, P. K. and Gjorv, O. E., Cem. Concr. Res. 12, 585–595 (1982).Google Scholar
2. Feldman, R. F. and Huang, C.-Y., Cem. Concr. Res. 15, 943–952 (1985).Google Scholar
3. C.-Y., Huang and Feldman, R. F., Cem. Concr. Res. 15, 285–294 (1985).Google Scholar
4. MRS, Call for Paper, 1987 Fall Meeting, Symposium R, 24.Google Scholar
5. Shah, S. P. and Chandra, S., JACI 65, 770–781 (1968).Google Scholar
6. Nepper-Christensen, P. and Nielsen, T. P. H., JACI 66, 69–72 (1969).Google Scholar
7. Darwin, D. and Slate, F. O., J. Mater. 5, 86–98 (1970).Google Scholar
8. Perry, C. and Gillott, J. E., Cem. Concr. Res. 15, 553–564 (1977).Google Scholar
9. Maher, A. and Darwin, D., First Int. Conf. Math. Model. (Univ. Missouri-Rolla 1977) III, 1705–1714.Google Scholar
10. ASTM C 305-82 04.01, 249–252 (1985).Google Scholar