MinimumWaterRequirementMethodforHigh-Performance ...downloads.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2019/4187342.pdf · ments: Portland, sulphoaluminate, and aluminate cement [4]. Portland cement

Research ArticleMinimum Water Requirement Method for High-PerformanceSulphoaluminate Cement-Based Materials

Hong-ping Zhang 12 Pei-kangBai2 Jian-hongWang2 Yan-li Dong1 andYun-shanHan1

1School of Science North University of China TaiYuan ShanXi 030051 China2School of Materials Science and Engineering North University of China TaiYuan ShanXi 030051 China

Correspondence should be addressed to Hong-ping Zhang jilin44163com

Received 27 April 2018 Revised 1 October 2018 Accepted 24 October 2018 Published 6 January 2019

Academic Editor Luıs Evangelista

Copyright copy 2019 Hong-ping Zhang et al is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work isproperly cited

In this work we propose the use of steel slag instead of slag powder in addition to fly ash and silica fume to obtain high-performance sulphoaluminate cement-based materials According to the closest-packing theory and on the basis of the minimumwater requirement test the influence of mineral admixtures on the minimum water requirement was evaluated for sulphoa-luminate composite system paste e optimal composition of the cementitious materials was thus determined Orthogonal testswere used to assess the validity of this ratio e correlation between minimum water requirement and the standard consistencewas not only analyzed in the system of the minimum water requirement method decided but also in the complicate system of theorthogonal tests determined Experimental results show that the influence of steel slag on the minimum water requirement is thelargest in composite cement paste minimum water requirement and standard consistency have a good correlation the cementpaste designed with the optimum composite had the highest strength of all the tested materials but minimum water requirementand strength have a poor correlation in the orthogonal tests We demonstrate that standard consistency evaluation can replace theminimum water requirement method to determine the optimum ratio of cement mineral admixtures e proposed method notonly simplifies the process but also makes the method more scientific

1 Introduction

Recently the research and applications of cement-basedmaterials have remarkably progressed Accordingly themechanical properties and durability of modern cement-based materials have been significantly improved e mostcommon approach to obtain high-performance cement-based materials is to reduce the porosity and increasecompactness [1] ese materials have high strength anddensity because of their low water-cement ratio which ismost of the times lower than 02 and also because of theaddition of fine particles e diameter of such particles issmall enough to gradually fill the gaps left by larger particlesoptimizing the overall composition until the gap betweensolid particles reaches minimum thus a high stackingdensity is achieved and the water requirement is minimalerefore the properties and the accumulation state of

cementitious materials are closely related To obtain high-performance materials it is crucial to develop granularmixtures with high compactness and low water requirement[2]

ere are two important characteristic indexes whenevaluating the effect of fine particles on high-performanceconcrete stacking density and water to solid volume ratio onthe matrix is ratio represents the volume of unit solidmaterial in a paste with the water requirement for a fixedworking consistency e stacking density of solid particlesin the concrete considers the physical contribution of fineparticles with a diameter under 0125mm (including ce-ment) in relation to the strength and compactness of thestructure When comparing equivalent water-cement ratiosthe porosity of paste with the lower water to solid volumeratio is lower and the compressive strength is higher Alsothe water requirement of the fine particles which depends

HindawiAdvances in Materials Science and EngineeringVolume 2019 Article ID 4187342 11 pageshttpsdoiorg10115520194187342

on the stacking density of particles can be used to determinethe water to solid volume ratio For a good particle com-position the particles with small diameter fill the spacesbetween coarser particles thus reducing both the unfilledvoids and the water required to fill pores [2]

ere are several methods to evaluate the compactness ofcement gel material theoretical calculations model pre-diction analysis paste relative density standard consistencywater requirement ratio stacking density Puntke saturationpoint water requirement minimum water requirement andwet process among others e last four are direct de-termination methods [3] Minimum water requirement isoften used especially

Presently there are three types of widely reported ce-ments Portland sulphoaluminate and aluminate cement[4] Portland cement is most often used to prepare high-performance concrete for the sulphoaluminate and alu-minate ones there are only a few related reports eirlimitations for engineering applications rise from theirdefects eg the reduction in later strength ereforecertain issues need to be overcome so that these varieties arefurther developed and used A possible solution is thecombination with mineral admixtures which not only re-duces cement cost but also promotes the use of waste eefficient utilization of waste represents an important ad-vantage for the environment and most importantly maycompensate the reduction in later strength [5] Zhang et al[6] proved sulphoaluminate cement had characteristic ofhigher early strength and steady later strength throughcompounding slag and fly ash but they adopted a tentativemethod to prepare the high-performance concrete whichwasted his much time and lacked theoretical guidance it isvery significant to find a good method to replace the tra-ditional method

As one of the mineral admixtures in comparison with flyash and slag ground steel slag has been utilized less suffi-ciently because of the rare investigation on its characteristicsand its usage as cementing material Liu [7] studied prep-aration and application of RPC with steel slag but steel wasnot used as active ingredients but as aggregate the maxi-mum of particle size was 25mm As a new mineral additiveof cement ground steel slag powder has very high activityand its activity is obviously higher than fly ash and close toslag Furthermore its distribution is very wide and itsquantity is quite plenty in China erefore it has quite highvalue [8]

In this study sulphoaluminate cement steel slag (insteadof slag powder) fly ash and silica fume were used to developcomposite cement According to the closest-packing theoryand the method of the minimum water requirement it willbe obtained to the maximum density of composite systemPeng [9] obtained the optimum powder ratio of compositionof the cementitious materials through the minimum waterrequirement method Peng also only took the method as ameans not in-depth discussions the character of themethodwas not mentioned and the existing problem was not an-alyzed In addition to this the test depends on the experi-mental observations and the operative determines thecritical condition where the mixture transforms from the

solid to paste state thus it is highly subjective and un-scientific erefore it is very necessary to seek a newmethod to replace the minimumwater requirement method

In this work we propose an alternative method to de-termine the compactness of cement materials is methodeliminates the errors that rise from the subjective mea-surements in the minimum water requirement methodwhen estimating the end point of paste preparation based onthe status of the mixture To make this method moreconvictive we determined the correlation between mini-mum basic water requirement and standard consistency Ifthe correlation of two methods is better we can utilizestandard consistency instead of minimum basic water re-quirement method to determine the optimum powder ratioof composition of the cementitious materials

2 Materials and Experiment Programs

21Materials Used P425 rapid hardening sulphoaluminatecement was produced by Tianlong Cement Factory ShanxiChina Its specific surface area is 4046 gcm2 II grade fly ashwas obtained from Second ermal Power Plant TaiyuanChina with the specific surface area of 3051 gcm2 Steel slagwas purchased from Taiyuan Iron and Steel Group Co LtdChina with the specific surface area of 370 gcm2 especific area of silica fume (Shaanxi Linyuan Micro SiliconPowder Company China) was close to 20000 gcm2 ewater reducing agent is imported from BASF Germanyephysical properties of the sulphoaluminate cement are listedin Table 1 while the chemical compositions of the usedcement and mineral admixtures are shown in Table 2

22 Particle Size Analysis e particle size distribution ofcement samples was analyzed using a laser particle sizeanalyzer e result is obtained in Figure 1

23 Materials Mixes e cementitious mix proportion wasdesigned by the minimum water requirement method eprocess was carried out in [10] to obtain the optimumpowder ratio of mix

24 Mixing Methods e method that was used for mixingmaterials and the curing conditions are in accordance withthose given in GBT1346-2001

25 (e Optimum Powder Ratio Test e optimum powderratio test was determined using the following tests

(i) Minimum water requirement test(ii) Standard consistency test GBT1346-2001(iii) Compactness test GBT208-1994

Minimum water requirement [11 12] was introduced byLCPC to determine the practical stacking density of powderparticles through the measurement of minimum basic waterrequirement in a paste According to equation (1) themaximum packing density of the cementing material is

2 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

empty 1

1 + ρmwmB( 1113857 (1)

where ρ is the density of the cementing material mixturegcm3 mB is the mass of the cementing material g andmW is the minimum water requirement of the paste g

26 Orthogonal Test e tests conducted on the cementpaste are as follows

(i) Compressive strength GBT17671-1999(ii) Minimum water requirement test(iii) Standard consistency test GBT1346-2001

Because the main aim of the article is to verifywhether the ratio determined by the minimal basic waterrequirement is optimum the amount of water reducingagent usually is set to a limit dosage ie saturation pointwhich is determined by examining the fluidity of cementpaste Herein the optimum amount of water reducingagent was determined to be 06 e water blinder ratio

is determined by the fluidity of cement paste and themechanical properties of cement erefore it is un-certain whether it is the smallest ratio of water to cement

ree influencing factors are chosen in orthogonal ex-periments and each takes three levels In view of the abovediscussion the water-cement ratio is fixed at 027 e waterreducing agent is fixed as 06 of the total quality ofcomposite cementing material e test ratios of the ninegroups of cementitious materials are shown in Table 3

3 Results and Discussion

31 (e Optimum Powder Ratio Test

311 (e Minimum Water Requirement Test and Com-pactness Test In this section the influence of fly ash dosageon minimum water requirement and density of the binarysystem of steel slagrsquos dosage on the parameters of the ternarysystem and of silica fumersquos dosage on the parameters of thequaternary system was evaluated and the results are shownin Figure 2ndash7

Figure 2 shows that the effect of fly ash dosage on thewater requirement and density as fly ash dosage increasesthe minimum water requirement of the paste initially de-creases and the density first increases and more fine fly ashparticles fill the gap between particles improve the density ofcomposite system and reduce the water requirement to fillthe voids of paste particles when fly ash dosage is for a 75content the minimum value of minimum water re-quirement and themaximum value of maximum density willbe obtained this corresponds to the point where the numberof voids between particles is the lowest and then the amountof water to fill the voids is also minimal According toequation (1) the stacking density of the system reaches themaximum value at this point ereafter minimum waterrequirement increases and compactness decreases when thecontent of fly ash further increases at the same time Figure 1shows that the particle size of fly ash is less than that ofsulphoaluminate cement the specific surface area of thesystem becomes greater with more fine particles of fly ash

Table 1 Physical properties index of cement

Density(gcm3)

Specificarea

(gcm2)Stability Standard

consistence

Settingtime(min)

Rupturestrength(MPa)

Compressionstrength(MPa)

Initialsetting

Finalsetting 1 d 3 d 1 d 3 d

276 410 Qualified 0282 21 30 75 8 40 52

Table 2 Chemical compositions () of cement and mineral admixtures

Loss on ignition SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO SO3 Na2O K2O R2OSulphoaluminate cement 533 163 275 123 365 202 978 024 037 057Steel slag mdash 1548 234 2518 3752 543 mdash mdash 012Fly ash mdash 5128 2412 578 312 108 027 mdash mdash mdashSilica fume mdash 8812 024 007 018 026 mdash mdash 03 mdash

10minus2 10minus1 100 101 102 1030

20

40

60

80

100

Particle size (μm)

Cum

ulat

ive p

erce

ntag

e of p

artic

le si

ze (

)

Silica fumeSteel slag

Fly ashSulphoaluminate cement

Figure 1 Cumulative percentage of particle size distribution of rawmaterials

Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 3

and the water amount of the surface layer of the powderparticles in the paste increases it leads to minimum waterrequirement increase and the density decreases Figure 2

indicates that there is only a slight effect of fly ash on thewater requirement because the curve is slower than that ofFigure 3 and the minimum value of minimum water re-quirement (0254) is less than that of cement paste (0267)is small influence may be explained by the fact that inaddition to grain diameter and granularity the shape of the

Table 3 Mix ratios of compound cement paste

Dosage ()Test No Cement Fly ash Silica fume Steel slag Water binder ratio Water reducing agentA1 865 4 5 45 027 06A2 77 4 10 9 027 06A3 675 4 15 135 027 06A4 80 6 5 9 027 06A5 705 6 10 135 027 06A6 745 6 15 45 027 06A7 675 8 5 135 027 06A8 775 8 10 45 027 06A9 68 8 15 9 027 06

000 005 010 015 020 025025

026

027

028

029

030

Fly ash content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

Minimal basic water contentStandard consistanceDegree of density

Figure 2 Fly ash content effect on standard consistence minimalwater requirement and stacking density

006 008 010 012 014 016 018 020

027

028

029

030

031

032

033

Steel slag content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)


Figure 3 Steel slag content effect on standard consistence minimalwater requirement and stacking density

000 005 010 015 020

024

025

026

027W

ater

cont

ent (

) 028

029

030

Silica fume content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity


Figure 4 Silica fume on standard consistence minimal waterrequirement and stacking density

Figure 5 Fly ash (SEM)


particles is also an important factor Because of the char-acteristics of spherical particles and the adequate particleshape of fly ash the ball bearing and wettability effects areremarkable erefore the mechanical friction betweenparticles is relatively small after particle packing and themoisture needed to wet the surface is reduced the amount ofwater necessary to reach the same humidity is lower (Fig-ure 5) [13 14] For the binary system (FA+ SAC) the op-timum content of fly ash is 75 the minimum basic waterrequirement of the mixed system is 0254 and the maximumstacking density is 0553

According to Figure 3 the behavior of minimum waterrequirement and density after adding steel slag into thebinary system is similar to that of adding fly ash into thecement system that is the minimum water requirementinitially decreases and then increases with increasing steelslag powder dosage e minimum water requirement is0266 at 10 (optimal proportion) and the stacking com-pactness is 0548 at this point Figure 3 shows that comparedwith the minimum value (0254) of minimum water re-quirement of the binary system and the maximum value(0553) of density the minimum value (0266) of the pasteincreases after adding steel slag and the maximum (0548)compactness decreases is can be explained because the

minimum water requirement of the paste involves twofactors the amount of water in the voids and the amount ofwater on the surface of the particles After adding steel slagthe amount of water on the surface is greatly affected by theshape of particles the sphericity coefficient of steel slagparticles is small and they are irregular so the water re-quirement is large (Figure 6) [15 16] Besides Figure 1shows that the particle size of steel slag is larger than theparticle size of fly ash even close to the particle size ofsulphoaluminate cement its ability to fill the gap of pasteparticles is poorer than fly ash

Similar to the ternary system the quaternary one is ob-tained by fixing the proportion of (FA+SAC+SS) which is08325 00675 010 and then adding the silica fume in dif-ferent proportions into the mixed system Figure 4 shows thatwith the addition of silica fume the minimum basic waterrequirement of the paste has a similar behavior that the onedescribed above it first decreases and then increases withincreasing silica fume e maximum density also initiallyincreases and then decreases e optimum dosage of silicafume is 10 where the minimum basic water requirement is024 and the maximum density is 0573 Comparing Figures 2and 3 the minimum water requirement of the paste hasdecreased and the maximum compactness is larger is alsoshows that the gradation of particles is closely related to thecompactness For the larger difference of particle size and thewider distribution of it the large packing density will be easilyachieved [17] Since the particle size of silica fume is small(Figure 7) it fills the voids between particles and improves theparticle size distribution compared with the ternary systemthus the water content is reduced and compactness is en-hanced e minimum water requirement the optimalcomposition 024 is lower than that of the ternary systemwith further increasing the silica fume because of the largerspecific area of silica fume (Figure 1) It will lead to the in-crease in surface layer of the powder particles and thus thewater requirement of surface layer will increase In terms ofimproving the stacking compactness adding three kinds ofparticles of different sizes is more efficient than adding onlytwo kinds of particles e optimum ratio of silica fume is10

According to the results obtained from the minimumwater requirement method the optimum ratio of the sul-phoaluminate cementitious material is 075 006 009 010for SAC FA SF SS e test verified again that when thereasonable particle size reaches or be close to the tightestclosely packed state these cement materials have highstrength and density because fine particles fill the gap left bylarger particles [2]

312 Standard Consistency Test e influence of threekinds of mineral admixtures dosage on standard consistencyof respective system was evaluated and the results also areshown in Figures 2ndash4e influence of them on the standardconsistency of the paste is similar to that on the minimumbasic water requirement at is the variation trends of thetwo curves in every graph are same the minimum value ofstandard consistency and the minimum value of minimum

Figure 6 Steel slag (SEM)

Figure 7 Silica fume (SEM)


water requirement are acquired in the same dosage ofmineral admixture As previously mentioned the stackingdensity and water to solid volume ratio are two importantindexes to evaluate the influence of fine particles on high-performance concrete Volume ratio is defined for a certainwork consistency thus different work consistencies havedifferent water requirement e minimum basic waterrequirement is needed when changing from solid powder toforming spheration particle (Figure 8) into paste state(Figure 9) e standard consistency corresponds to thewater requirement when the test rod sinks into the grout andsinks to 6mm plusmn 1mm away from the floor (Figure 10)eseare different states of same property corresponding to theconditions of the solid powder when adding differentamounts of water is former depends on the experimentalobservations to determine the critical condition where themixture transforms from the solid to paste state thus it ishighly subjective and lacks scientificity but the latter ac-quires the concrete value to determine the state throughVicat apparatus

For this composition according to the results obtainedfrom the minimum water requirement method the mini-mum water requirement and standard consistency are thesmallest and the density is largest e result is in agreementwith Zhangrsquos conclusion Zhang and Zhang [18] pointed outthat slag cement would have higher density and strength andlower standard consistency when the particle size distri-bution of slag cement was close to the closest-packingtheory though Zhang did not discuss the relation be-tween the minimum water requirement and the density ofslag cement we all know that the theory basis of theminimum water requirement method is the closest-packingtheory so the two results are consistent In addition to thisthe composition system determined by the minimum waterrequirement and the one obtained by Zhang are also binarysystems and more simple though the system for the min-imum water requirement is not a genuine binary system(Zhangrsquos test cement system is genuine binary system thathas two kinds of materials) e scope of application for theminimum basic water requirement method to evaluate thecompactness is generally considered for binary powdermaterialse two corresponding systems determined by theAim-Goff model and by the Toufar model to analyze dif-ferent stacking densities of mixed powder materials are alsogenerally for binary systems [19] e ternary system in thiswork is obtained from an initial cement and fly ash mixturein a fixed proportion (0925 0075) mixed with steel slagen the quaternary system is based on a cement fly ashand steel slag mixture in a fixed proportion (08325 00675 010) to which silica fume is added erefore in essencethey can be considered as binary systems initial mixture plusthe additional mineral

In the binary system as previously discussed wedemonstrate that standard consistency evaluation can re-place the minimum water requirement method to determinethe optimum ratio of cement mineral admixtures

How is the relation between standard consistency ofpaste and the minimum water consistent when the com-posite system is the genuine ternary system (three mineral

admixtures) or the genuine quaternary (four mineral ad-mixtures) system In order to verify the strength obtainedfrom optimum ratio is the largest and to discuss the cor-relation of them in the complicated system in the followingsection the design of an orthogonal experiment to evaluatethis ratio is presented

32 Orthogonal Test e test results of the nine groups ofcementitious materials are shown in Tables 4 and 5

Figure 8 Solid particle

Figure 9 Paste state


321 Standard Consistency Test Table 5 shows the analysisof the orthogonal test results e influence of the factorsaffecting the material standard consistency is as follows slagsteel powergt silica fumegt fly ash e result is consistentwith the influence of mineral admixture on the standardconsistency of the paste through analyzing optimum powderratio test Range analysis shows that steel slag is the mostimportant factor affecting the standard consistency its Kvalue is 0227 For silica fume the K value is 0202ese twovalues are very similar e relationship between averagestandard consistency of paste and contents of slag steel

Figure 10 Cement standard consistency

Table 4 Compressive strength standard consistency and minimal water requirement

Dosage ()

Testnumber Cement Fly

ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement

28 d compressstrength(MPa)

A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660

Table 5 Orthogonal test analysis

FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF

Standard consistency

K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564


power silica fume and fly ash is shown in Figure 11 Withincreasing mineral admixtures content the two curves fromfly ash and silica fume have same trend that initially de-creases reaches the minimum value and then increases theresult is consistent with the optimum powder ratio test butthe behavior of steel slag is different from them the lowestpoint does not appear and standard consistency seems al-ways increasing with steel slag content the reason is steelslag is too sensitive to water and many factors are con-sidered in the orthogonal test For steel slag no matter howlarge the particle size is they are irregular so a large amountof water is necessary therefore it has a more notoriousinfluence than that of silica fume From K value the dif-ference between these two factors is not very significant themechanism by which they affect the consistence is not thesame Large specific surface area and large SiO2 content wereobserved for silica fume with small particle size (Figure 7) Inaddition silica fume has high pozzolanic activity during theearly hydration process and it may react with the Ca(OH)2produced due to cement hydration in a very short time togenerate a low calcium C-S-H gel us the early strength ofcementitious material can be increased However the ad-dition of silica fume requires a larger amount of waterbecause of the elevated heat release [19 20] e effect of flyash is the smallest among the three factors possibly becauseof its spherical particles e advantages of adequate particlemorphology ball bearing and wetting effect are significanterefore the mechanical friction between particles is rel-atively small after particle accumulation and the moisturerequired to damp the surface is reduced less water is neededto achieve the same moisture

322 Compressive Strength Test and the Optimum RatioDetermined According to Table 5 the effect on laterstrength is as follows silica fumegt fly ash gt steel slagpowder e different relationship between the average28 day compressive strength of the cement paste and thesilica fume slag steel and fly ash content is shown inFigure 12 Range analysis shows the effect of steel slagpowder and fly ash is very similar K value of former is3564 the latter is 3655 ese two values are very similarBut for silica fume K value is 4144 Since the increase insilica fume reduces the later strength it is necessary toconsider its role for cementing materials e influence ofsteel slag and fly ash on the later strength does not showremarkable differences With the increase in curing periodthe mineral phase of steel slag gradually hydrated pro-moting the strength increase of the composite system butto find whether it is steel slag fly ash or silica fume thereexists an optimum value it is consistent with the result ofoptimum powder ratio determined by the minimum basicwater requirement test For the functional effect of fly ashthe volcano ash filling densification and micro aggregateeffects may occur with the increase in curing period [21]

According to the K value analysis results (Table 5) thebest level should be 5 for the silica fume dosage because thedifference between the K values at 5 and 10 dosage is notvery large (2386MPa and 2360MPa) To take full advantage

of the waste resources without a great sacrifice in laterstrength the level of silica fume may be adjusted to 10eoptimum levels of fly ash and steel slag are 6 and 9Orthogonal test results show that the strength of the ratiodetermined by the minimal water requirement method is thehighest In addition to the optimum ratio ratios A2 and A4listed in Table 4 may be selected Moreover as seen inTable 4 the 28 d strength determined by the ratios close tothe optimum is high e result also is consistent withZhangrsquos conclusion [18]

323 Correlation between Minimum Basic Water Re-quirement and Standard Consistency In the system de-termined by minimum water requirement method we have

4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042

The content of mineral addition ()

Fly ashSilica fumeSteel slag

Figure 11 e relationship between the standard consistencyaverage and the added mineral content

4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80

Fly ashSteel slagSilica fume


Figure 12e relationship curve between the 28-day compressionaverage and added mineral content


drawn a conclusion that standard consistency evaluation canreplace the minimum water requirement method to evaluatethe preparation of high-density composite cement If in thecomplicated system the correlation of standard consistencyand minimal water is higher the minimum water re-quirement method can be really replaced by standardconsistency evaluation method To further understand therelationship between these parameters the orthogonal testresults are presented in Figure 13e plot clearly shows thatthe two curves have the same behavior For a quantitativeanalysis the correlation coefficient of the two curves fromnine groups of ratio of the orthogonal test was determinede correlation coefficient is 0948 which indicates thatthere is a good correlation between them because they aredifferent states of same property of composite system pasteeven though the quaternary system is more complicated Todetermine the optimum proportion of mineral admixturefor high-performance cementitious materials the standardconsistency of the mixing system could be measured toindirectly obtain information about the minimum basicwater requirement If only the optimum proportion of thecementitious material is required and not the compactnessit is only necessary to measure standard consistency If inaddition to the optimum proportion it is necessary to knowthe maximum density of the paste the minimum basic waterrequirement could be measured only for the already de-termined optimum proportion and the density would beobtained using equation (1) In this manner it is possible toeliminate the errors that rise from the subjective de-termination of the mixture state in the minimum basic waterrequirement tests e proposed method not only simplifiesthe process but also makes the method more scientific

324 Correlation between Minimum Basic Water Re-quirement (Standard Consistency) and Strength e cor-relations between strength (compactness) and minimumbasic water requirement and strength and standard con-sistency are not good they are all negative correlations asshown in Figure 14 e former is minus0714 and the latter isminus0767 However it can be seen that the paste with lowerminimum basic water requirement or standard consistencyhas an overall higher strength while the strength of thepastes with high water requirement is generally lower

e main reason for such poor correlation is that manyfactors are considered in the orthogonal test e genuinequaternary powder materials are more complicated than thebinary for the minimum basic water requirement method toevaluate the compactness generally considered Addition-ally the minimum basic water requirement and compressivestrength are two different properties the influence of morefactors on two properties is different though they have goodconsistency in binary powder because there is less influ-encing factors In addition to these the poor correlationbetween water requirement and strength may be due to theparticle shape which is an important factor along with sizeand granularity e level of understanding for the re-lationship between particle shape and compactness ofnonspherical particles is very limited Some reports [20 21]

attempt to predict the compactness of nonspherical particlesby considering the parameter of the sphericity but the re-sults show that the prediction is not accurate In factminimum water requirement includes the water of particlegaps and on the surface but the shape of the particles has agreater influence on the latter e sphericity coefficient ofsteel slag particles is small and the water requirement is largeso this is also an important factor causing the poor corre-lation between them

e correlation between minimum basic water re-quirement and strength (density) and standard consistencyand strength is poor in the orthogonal test but it is higher inthe binary system e conclusion is consistent with Wanget al [22] Wang et al pointed that there was a certaincorrelation between water absorption ratio and strength of

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

Minimal basic water contentStandard consistance

Figure 13 Water requirement and standard consistence as afunction of the test number

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)

Minimal basic water contentStandard consistanceCompress strength

Figure 14 Water requirement standard consistence and com-pression strength as a function of the test number


cement-fly ash paste e more the composition of cementpaste was the more complex the interaction between thecomponents was and the worse the correlation between thewater absorption and the strength was but it was moreeffective to evaluate the correlation of the simple compo-nents of cement paste

4 Conclusions

(1) On the basis of the closest-packing theory high-performance sulphoaluminate cement can be pre-pared using the minimum basic water requirementmethod e optimum proportion of sulphoalumi-nate cement fly ash steel slag and silica fume is075 006 009 010 According to the results froman orthogonal test the paste prepared from thepowder with the optimal proportion has the higheststrength

(2) Steel slag and silica fume have great influence on thestandard consistency and minimum basic waterrequirement of the paste but the mechanism inwhich they act is different Steel slag can promote thelater strength of sulphoaluminate cement and it hasa good prospect as a mineral admixture e influ-ence of fly ash on them is less

(3) Whether in the system for the minimum basic waterrequirement method considered as binary systems orin the complicate system decided by the orthogonaltest the minimum basic water requirement has agood correlation with the standard consistency estandard consistency determination can replace theminimum basic water requirement method to in-directly obtain this information and evaluate thecompactness of the material

(4) e correlation between minimum basic water re-quirement and strength and standard consistencyand strength is poor in the orthogonal test eformer is lower than the latter is indirectlydemonstrates that the standard consistency methodis superior to the minimum basic water requirementmethod to evaluate the compactness of cementitiousmaterials

Data Availability

e data used to support the findings of this study areavailable from the corresponding author upon request

Conflicts of Interest

e authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest

Acknowledgments

is work was financially supported by the National NaturalScience Foundation of China (nos 51775521 and 51208473)Scientific and Technological Innovation Programs of HigherEducation Institutions in Shanxi and Primary Research and

Development Plan of Shanxi Province (Grant no201603D121020-1) e authors are grateful for these grants

References

[1] Y Wang M Su and L Zhang Sulphaoaluminate CementBeijing Industry press Beijing China 1st edition 1999

[2] M Schmidt and C Geisenhansluke ldquoe optimum compo-sition of fine particle in high performance and self-compaction concreterdquo Ready-Mixed-Concrete vol 4pp 62ndash70 2005

[3] Z Wang and C B ping ldquoApplication of the close packingtheory and characterization methods on cement-based ma-terialsrdquo Journal of Anhui Jianzhu University vol 23 no 2pp 70ndash74 2015

[4] Z Chenzhi Commercial Concrete Chemical Industry PressBeijing China 2006

[5] Z He H Yang and M Liu ldquoHydration mechanism of sul-phoaluminate cementrdquo Journal of Wuhan University ofTechnologyndashMater Sci Ed vol 29 no 1 pp 70ndash74 2013

[6] D Zhang D Xu X Cheng and W Chen ldquoCarbonationresistance of sulphoaluminate cement-based high perfor-mance concreterdquo Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater Sci Ed vol 24 no 4 pp 663ndash666 2009

[7] J-z Liu ldquoStudy on Preparation and Application of ReactivePowder Concrete with Steel Slagrdquo Chongqing UniversityChongqing China 2001

[8] Y-x Li Study on Composition Structure and Properities ofCement and Concrete with Steel ndashMaking Slag Powder MineralAdditive China Building Materials Academy MarsquoanshanChina 2003

[9] Y-zhou Peng Study on Composition Structure and Propertiesof RPC Containing Steel Slag Powder WuHan University ofTechmology Wuhan China 2009

[10] LB XieYoujun and L Guangcheng ldquoStudy on dense packingproperties of cementitious materialrdquo Journal of Chinese Ce-ramic Society vol 29 no 6 pp 512ndash516 2001

[11] T Stovall F de Larrard and M Buil ldquoLinear packing densitymodel of grain mixturesrdquo Powder Technology vol 48 no 1pp 1ndash12 1986

[12] F de Larrard and T Sedran ldquoOptimization of ultra-high-performance concrete by the use of a packing modelrdquo Cementand Concrete Research vol 24 no 6 pp 997ndash1009 1994

[13] HY Xie and L H Jun Powder Mechanics and EngineeringChemical Industry Press Beijing China 2013

[14] Q Wang and P Yan ldquoHydration properties of basic oxygenfurnace steel slagrdquo Construction and Building Materialsvol 24 no 7 pp 1134ndash1140 2010

[15] Y Peng K Chen and S Hu ldquoInfluence of the characteristicsof steel slag powder particle on compression strength of re-active powder concreterdquo Building Materials vol 14 no 4pp 541ndash545 2011

[16] D Adolfsson N Menad E Vigght and B BjormanldquoSteelmaking slag as raw material for sulphoaluminate belitecementrdquo Advance in Cement Research vol 19 no 4pp 47ndash156 2007

[17] W Zou J Yin and L I Yi-jin ldquoStudy on dense packingmodelof cementitious materialsrdquo Concrete vol 10 pp 20ndash24 2010

[18] Y-juan Zhang and X Zhang ldquoEffect of dense packing of fineslag powder and cement on properties of slag cementrdquoJournal of Tongji University(Nature science) vol 32 no 12pp 1642ndash1646 2004

[19] Z He H Yang S Hu and M Liu ldquoHydration mechanism ofsilica fume-sulphoaluminate cementrdquo Journal of Wuhan


University of Technology-Mater Sci Ed vol 28 no 6pp 1128ndash1133 2013

[20] Z Chen Application of High Performance Concrete ChinaArchitecture and Building Press Beijing China 1994

[21] P Yan and Q Zhang ldquoMicrostructural characteristics ofcomplex binger paste containing active or inert mineral ad-mixturesrdquo Chinese Ceramic Society vol 34 no 12pp 1491ndash1496 2006

[22] J-H Wang X Jia and J-H Zhao ldquoStudy of strength rele-vance to water absorption of cement mortar-fly ash bodyrdquoCoal Ash China vol 1 pp 3ndash5 2009


CorrosionInternational Journal of

Hindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018

Advances in

Materials Science and EngineeringHindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018


Journal of

Chemistry

Analytical ChemistryInternational Journal of


ScienticaHindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018

Polymer ScienceInternational Journal of



Advances in Condensed Matter Physics


International Journal of

BiomaterialsHindawiwwwhindawicom

Journal ofEngineeringVolume 2018

Applied ChemistryJournal of


NanotechnologyHindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018

Journal of


High Energy PhysicsAdvances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2013Hindawiwwwhindawicom

The Scientific World Journal

Volume 2018

TribologyAdvances in



ChemistryAdvances in


Advances inPhysical Chemistry


BioMed Research InternationalMaterials

Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls


Journal ofNanomaterials

Submit your manuscripts atwwwhindawicom

on the stacking density of particles can be used to determinethe water to solid volume ratio For a good particle com-position the particles with small diameter fill the spacesbetween coarser particles thus reducing both the unfilledvoids and the water required to fill pores [2]

ere are several methods to evaluate the compactness ofcement gel material theoretical calculations model pre-diction analysis paste relative density standard consistencywater requirement ratio stacking density Puntke saturationpoint water requirement minimum water requirement andwet process among others e last four are direct de-termination methods [3] Minimum water requirement isoften used especially

Presently there are three types of widely reported ce-ments Portland sulphoaluminate and aluminate cement[4] Portland cement is most often used to prepare high-performance concrete for the sulphoaluminate and alu-minate ones there are only a few related reports eirlimitations for engineering applications rise from theirdefects eg the reduction in later strength ereforecertain issues need to be overcome so that these varieties arefurther developed and used A possible solution is thecombination with mineral admixtures which not only re-duces cement cost but also promotes the use of waste eefficient utilization of waste represents an important ad-vantage for the environment and most importantly maycompensate the reduction in later strength [5] Zhang et al[6] proved sulphoaluminate cement had characteristic ofhigher early strength and steady later strength throughcompounding slag and fly ash but they adopted a tentativemethod to prepare the high-performance concrete whichwasted his much time and lacked theoretical guidance it isvery significant to find a good method to replace the tra-ditional method

As one of the mineral admixtures in comparison with flyash and slag ground steel slag has been utilized less suffi-ciently because of the rare investigation on its characteristicsand its usage as cementing material Liu [7] studied prep-aration and application of RPC with steel slag but steel wasnot used as active ingredients but as aggregate the maxi-mum of particle size was 25mm As a new mineral additiveof cement ground steel slag powder has very high activityand its activity is obviously higher than fly ash and close toslag Furthermore its distribution is very wide and itsquantity is quite plenty in China erefore it has quite highvalue [8]

In this study sulphoaluminate cement steel slag (insteadof slag powder) fly ash and silica fume were used to developcomposite cement According to the closest-packing theoryand the method of the minimum water requirement it willbe obtained to the maximum density of composite systemPeng [9] obtained the optimum powder ratio of compositionof the cementitious materials through the minimum waterrequirement method Peng also only took the method as ameans not in-depth discussions the character of themethodwas not mentioned and the existing problem was not an-alyzed In addition to this the test depends on the experi-mental observations and the operative determines thecritical condition where the mixture transforms from the

solid to paste state thus it is highly subjective and un-scientific erefore it is very necessary to seek a newmethod to replace the minimumwater requirement method

In this work we propose an alternative method to de-termine the compactness of cement materials is methodeliminates the errors that rise from the subjective mea-surements in the minimum water requirement methodwhen estimating the end point of paste preparation based onthe status of the mixture To make this method moreconvictive we determined the correlation between mini-mum basic water requirement and standard consistency Ifthe correlation of two methods is better we can utilizestandard consistency instead of minimum basic water re-quirement method to determine the optimum powder ratioof composition of the cementitious materials

2 Materials and Experiment Programs

21Materials Used P425 rapid hardening sulphoaluminatecement was produced by Tianlong Cement Factory ShanxiChina Its specific surface area is 4046 gcm2 II grade fly ashwas obtained from Second ermal Power Plant TaiyuanChina with the specific surface area of 3051 gcm2 Steel slagwas purchased from Taiyuan Iron and Steel Group Co LtdChina with the specific surface area of 370 gcm2 especific area of silica fume (Shaanxi Linyuan Micro SiliconPowder Company China) was close to 20000 gcm2 ewater reducing agent is imported from BASF Germanyephysical properties of the sulphoaluminate cement are listedin Table 1 while the chemical compositions of the usedcement and mineral admixtures are shown in Table 2

22 Particle Size Analysis e particle size distribution ofcement samples was analyzed using a laser particle sizeanalyzer e result is obtained in Figure 1

23 Materials Mixes e cementitious mix proportion wasdesigned by the minimum water requirement method eprocess was carried out in [10] to obtain the optimumpowder ratio of mix

24 Mixing Methods e method that was used for mixingmaterials and the curing conditions are in accordance withthose given in GBT1346-2001

25 (e Optimum Powder Ratio Test e optimum powderratio test was determined using the following tests

(i) Minimum water requirement test(ii) Standard consistency test GBT1346-2001(iii) Compactness test GBT208-1994

Minimum water requirement [11 12] was introduced byLCPC to determine the practical stacking density of powderparticles through the measurement of minimum basic waterrequirement in a paste According to equation (1) themaximum packing density of the cementing material is


empty 1

1 + ρmwmB( 1113857 (1)












Density(gcm3)

Specificarea


consistence

Settingtime(min)



Initialsetting


276 410 Qualified 0282 21 30 75 8 40 52



10minus2 10minus1 100 101 102 1030

20

40

60

80

100

Particle size (μm)

Cum

ulat

ive p

erce

ntag

e of p

artic

le si

ze (

)









000 005 010 015 020 025025

026

027

028

029

030

Fly ash content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



006 008 010 012 014 016 018 020

027

028

029

030

031

032

033


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



000 005 010 015 020

024

025

026

027W

ater

cont

ent (

) 028

029

030


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity


























Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls




empty 1

1 + ρmwmB( 1113857 (1)












Density(gcm3)

Specificarea


consistence

Settingtime(min)



Initialsetting


276 410 Qualified 0282 21 30 75 8 40 52



10minus2 10minus1 100 101 102 1030

20

40

60

80

100

Particle size (μm)

Cum

ulat

ive p

erce

ntag

e of p

artic

le si

ze (

)









000 005 010 015 020 025025

026

027

028

029

030

Fly ash content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



006 008 010 012 014 016 018 020

027

028

029

030

031

032

033


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



000 005 010 015 020

024

025

026

027W

ater

cont

ent (

) 028

029

030


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity


























Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls








000 005 010 015 020 025025

026

027

028

029

030

Fly ash content ()

050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



006 008 010 012 014 016 018 020

027

028

029

030

031

032

033


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)



000 005 010 015 020

024

025

026

027W

ater

cont

ent (

) 028

029

030


050

052

054

056

058

060

Deg

ree o

f den

sity


























Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls

























Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls
















Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls







Dosage ()


ashSilicafume

Steelslag

Waterbinderratio

Waterreducingagent

Standardconsistence

Minimalwater

requirement


A1 865 4 5 45 027 06 0312 0243 851A2 77 4 10 9 027 06 036 0263 852A3 675 4 15 135 027 06 0468 0315 596A4 80 6 5 9 027 06 0358 0266 884A5 705 6 10 135 027 06 0407 0291 794A6 745 6 15 45 027 06 0363 0268 715A7 675 8 5 135 027 06 0392 0277 651A8 775 8 10 45 027 06 0352 0251 714A9 68 8 15 9 027 06 0420 0280 660


FunctionDosage ()

FF SS SF


K1 1172 1049 1027K2 1128 1151 117K3 1151 1251 1254R 0044 0202 0227

Strength after 28 d

K1 2299 2386 228K2 2393 2360 2396K3 2025 1971 2041R 3655 4144 3564







4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls









4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 15

034

035

036

037

038

Stan

dard

bod

y av

erag

e (

)

039

040

041

042




4 45 5 6 8 9 10 135 1564

66

68

70

The 2

8-d

com

pres

sion

stren

gth

aver

age

ofce

men

t pas

te (M

Pa)

72

74

76

78

80










A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls









A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9

025

030

035

Wat

er co

nten

t (

)

040

045

050

Test number

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

28-

d co

mpr

ess s

tren

gth

(MPa

)





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls





4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments



References




























Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls











Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls






Advances in



Journal of

Chemistry















Journal of





Volume 2018









Journal of


Na

nom

ate

ria

ls




Documents

MinimumWaterRequirementMethodforHigh-Performance ...downloads.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2019/4187342.pdf · ments: Portland, sulphoaluminate, and aluminate cement [4]. Portland cement