Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T15:12:11.385Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of XRD in a rapid quality control system of cement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

G. Goswami  and
J. D. Panda
G. Goswami
Affiliation:
Dalmia Institute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Rajgangpur-770017, India
J. D. Panda
Affiliation:
Dalmia Institute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Rajgangpur-770017, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present paper establishes that the ratio between the XRD pulse counts of cement clinkers at d=0.278 and 0.274 nm bears a distinct relationship with the degree of sintering of the clinker, which is one of the factors that determine the cement quality. The paper also presents a rapid and accurate method for predicting both 3- and 28-day compressive strength (CCS) of cement mortar cubes based on XRD of the cement clinkers. The method is based on an index Xn derived from the XRD pulse counts at d=0.2959 and 0.287 nm corresponding to alite (hkl=202) and belite (hkl=102) phases of the clinker, respectively. The regression equation derived for a particular plant is (1) 3 day CCS=Xn×240 kg/cm2, when Xn<1 and 240+26 (Xn−1) kg/cm2, when Xn>1, where Xnmaximum=5.5. (2) 28 day CCS=C+C×In/100, where C=3 days CCS estimated by XRD (1), In=90−10Xn, where Xnmax=5.5. Calculated CCS values, in average, vary from the conventional test values by +5.9% to −5.4% and +3.8% to −3.5% in cases of 3- and 28-day CCS, respectively.

Keywords

Cement strengthcement clinkercement mortarXRD pulse counts
Type
Research Article
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 114 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

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

Adamson, B. W., and Yellepeddi, R. S. (1992). “Chemical analysis of cement: A more complete solution,” World Cem. 23(8),28.Google Scholar
Aldridge, L. P. (1982). “Accuracy and precision of an X-ray diffraction method for analyzing portland cement,” Cem. Concr. Res. 12, 437–446.Google Scholar
Alexander, K. M. (1972). “The relationship between strength and the composition and fineness of cement,” Cem. Concr. Res. 2, 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beilmann, R., and Bruggemann, H. (1991). “Quantitative XRD clinker phase analysis: A tool for process optimization and cement quality control,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Cement Microscopy, Florida (The International Cement Microscopy Association, Duncanville, Texas).Google Scholar
Goswami, G. (1989). “Quick prediction of cement strength by X-ray diffractometry,” TIZ Int. Powder Mag. 113(10),819–820.Google Scholar
Goswami, G., Mohapatra, B. N., and Panda, J. D. (1991). “Characterization of burning condition of cement clinker by X-ray diffractometry,” Cem. Concr. Res. 21, 1176–1179.Google Scholar
Goswami, G., and Panda, J. D. (1991). “Quick prediction of 28-days cement strength by X-ray diffractometry,” TIZ Int. Powder Bulk Mag. 115(5),208–210.Google Scholar
Goswami, G., and Panda, J. D. (1992). “X-ray diffractometry in prediction of cement strength,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Congress on Chemistry of Cement, New Delhi, 1992, Vol. VI (National Council for Cement and Building Materials, New Delhi), pp. 168–174.Google Scholar
Hilbig, M. (1992). “The POLAB Laboratory automation system,” World Cem. 23(8),3.Google Scholar
Lea, F. M. (1970). The Chemistry of Cement and Concrete (Edward Arnold Ltd, London), 3rd ed., p. 692.Google Scholar
Nick, K., and Althaus, E. (1989). “Quantitative determination of free lime in cement by X-ray diffraction,” TIZ Int. Powder Mag. 113(2),95–96.Google Scholar
Ono, Y. (1981). “Microscopical observation of clinker for the estimation of burning condition grindability and hydraulic activity,” Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Cement Microscopy, Houston (The International Cement Microscopy Association, Duncanville, Texas), pp. 198–210.Google Scholar