Physical properties and reactivity of pozzolans, and their influence on the properties of lime–pozzolan pastes

This paper studies how pozzolan properties including particle size, specific surface, chemical and mineral composition, amorphousness and water demand, affect their reactivity as well as the strength of lime–pozzolan pastes. Reactivity was evaluated with chemical, mechanical and mineralogical methods. A number of artificial pozzolans were investigated including Ground Granulated Blastfurnace Slag (GGBS); Leca; Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA); Calcined Clay (Metastar); Microsilica (MS); Rice Husk Ash (RHA); Red Brick Dust (RBD); Tile and Yellow Brick Dust (YBD). The paper concludes that the pozzolan’s specific surface has a much greater influence on the water demand of the paste than its particle size or the lime:pozzolan ratio. It was evidenced that each pozzolan has a particular water demand for a given workability that increased with its specific surface; and that the replacement of lime by pozzolan lowers the water demand of the paste except for Metastar, on account of its greater fineness and specific surface. There is a good correlation between the chemical and physical activity indices and the rate of portlandite consumption. These evidenced that the most amorphous pozzolans (Metastar, GGBS, RHA and MS) are the most active. Finally, it also appears from the results, that the amount of lime combined by reactive crystalline phases in the pozzolans is insignificant when compared to that bound by their amorphous fraction. The paper concludes that amorphousness determines pozzolan reactivity to a much greater extent than any other pozzolan property. It also concludes that the specific surface area of the pozzolan governs the water demand of the paste, while amorphousness largely determines the strength of the paste. In contrast, the chemical composition of the pozzolan is not instrumental as a variable affecting neither pozzolan reactivity nor the strength of the paste.

[1]  N. Y. Mostafa,et al.  Characterization and evaluation of the pozzolanic activity of Egyptian industrial by-products: I: Silica fume and dealuminated kaolin , 2001 .

[2]  D. Bish,et al.  Quantitative phase analysis using the Rietveld method , 1988 .

[3]  Antonia Moropoulou,et al.  ACCELERATED MICROSTRUCTURAL EVOLUTION OF A CALCIUM-SILICATE-HYDRATE (C-S-H) PHASE IN POZZOLANIC PASTES USING FINE SILICEOUS SOURCES: COMPARISON WITH HISTORIC POZZOLANIC MORTARS , 2004 .

[4]  A. Varshneya Fundamentals of Inorganic Glasses , 1993 .

[5]  J. Kaduk Modern powder diffraction. Reviews in mineralogy, Vol. 20 edited by D. L. Bish and J. E. Post , 1994 .

[6]  Jordi Payá,et al.  Enhanced conductivity measurement techniques for evaluation of fly ash pozzolanic activity , 2001 .

[7]  R. Hanley,et al.  A study of the workability of natural hydraulic lime mortars and its influence on strength , 2008 .

[8]  M. P. Luxán,et al.  Rapid evaluation of pozzolanic activity of natural products by conductivity measurement , 1989 .

[9]  Caijun Shi,et al.  Studies on several factors affecting hydration and properties of lime-pozzolan cements , 2001 .

[10]  L. Turanli,et al.  Pozzolanic activity of clinoptilolite: A comparative study with silica fume, fly ash and a non-zeolitic natural pozzolan , 2010 .

[11]  John Glengary Carr,et al.  An Investigation on the Effect of Brick Dust on Lime-Based Mortars , 1995 .

[12]  S. Caro,et al.  An investigation of Roman mortar technology through the petrographic analysis of archaeological material , 2008 .

[13]  R. Hanley,et al.  Flexural bond strength of natural hydraulic lime mortar and clay brick , 2010 .

[14]  Du Tran,et al.  Monitoring pozzolanic activity by direct activation with calcium hydroxide , 1996 .

[15]  S. Pavia A petrographic study of mortar hydraulicity. , 2008 .

[16]  P. Hewlett,et al.  Lea's chemistry of cement and concrete , 2001 .

[17]  F. Massazza,et al.  10 – Pozzolana and Pozzolanic Cements , 1998 .

[18]  John Bensted,et al.  Structure and Performance of Cements , 2001 .