Title:
Mechanical Performance and Microstructual Investigation of Binary and Ternary Lime Binders with Silica Fume and Metakaolin
Author(s):
Luca Penazzato, Rogiros Illampas, Ioannis Rigopoulos, Ioannis Ioannou, and Daniel V. Oliveira
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
362
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
164-178
Keywords:
curing age; mechanical properties; mortars; natural hydraulic lime; scanning electron microscopy; supplementary cementitious materials; sustainable materials
DOI:
10.14359/51740881
Date:
6/5/2024
Abstract:
The increasing demand for sustainable building products with lower carbon footprints is a huge global challenge that can hardly be faced by conventional cementitious mixtures. In this context, the use of alternative primary binders, such as hydraulic lime, should be explored. Research in this direction should aim at the development of innovative eco-friendly materials with suitable mechanical performance. For the retrofitting of masonry structures, for instance, it may be necessary to improve their mechanical properties by incorporating supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), further reducing, at the same time, their environmental impact.
This study investigates the effects of silica fume and metakaolin included either individually or together alongside natural hydraulic lime. The mechanical performance of such binary and ternary binders has been characterized in terms of flexural and compressive strength. Moreover, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) has been used to study the microstructure of the mixtures. Finally, a preliminary investigation concerning the effect of curing time in lime-based mixtures with combined silica fume and metakaolin has been performed to investigate the possible benefits of this approach. The results highlight the superior pozzolanic efficacy of silica fume compared to metakaolin and point towards the proper dosages of SCMs to achieve optimal mechanical performance.
Related References:
1. Groot C., Veiga R., Papayianni I. et al., “RILEM TC 277-LHS report: lime-based mortars for restoration – a review on long-term durability aspects and experience from practice”, Materials and Structures, 55, pp. 245, 2022. doi: 10.1617/s11527-022-02052-1
2. Favier A., De Wolf C., Scrivener K. and Habert G., “A sustainable future for the European cement and concrete industry: Technology assessment for full decarbonisation of the industry by 2050”, ETH Zürich, 2018. (Accessed 25 July, 2023). doi: 10.3929/ethz-b-000301843
3. Grist E.R., Paine K.A., Heath A., Norman J. and Pinder H., “The environmental credentials of hydraulic lime-pozzolan concretes”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 93, p. 26-37, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.047
4. Apostolopoulou M., Bakolos A. and Kotsainas M., “Mechanical and physical performance of natural hydraulic lime mortars”, Construction and Building Materials, 290, pp. 123272, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123272
5. Lanas J., Pérez Bernal J.L., Bello M.A. and Alvarez Galindo J.I., “Mechanical properties of natural hydraulic lime-based mortars”, Cement and Concrete Research, 34, p. 2191-2201, 2004. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.02.005
6. Adesina A., “Recent advances in the concrete industry to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions”, Environmental Challenges, 1, pp. 100004, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.envc.2020.100004
7. Panesar D.K., “Supplementary cementing materials”, Woodhead Publ. Ser. Civ. Eng., Developments in the Formulation and Reinforcement of Concrete (Second Edition), p. 55-85, 2019. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-102616-8.00003-4
8. Scrivener K., Martirena F., Bishnoi S. and Maity S., “Calcined clay limestone cements (LC3)”, Cement and Concrete Research, 114, p. 49-56, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.08.017
9. Zhang D., Zhang J., Wang D., Wang Y. and Ma X., “Influence of pozzolanic materials on the properties of natural hydraulic lime based mortars”, Construction and Building Materials, 244, pp. 118360, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118360
10. Ademovic N., Formisano A., Penazzato L. and Oliveira D.V., “Seismic and energy integrated retrofit of buildings: A critical review”, Front. Built Environ., 8: 963337, 2022. doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2022.963337
11. EN 459-1, “Building lime - Part 1: Definitions, specifications and conformity criteria”, CEN, Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
12. Fernandez R., Martirena F. and Scrivener K.L., “The origin of the pozzolanic activity of calcined clay minerals, A comparison between kaolinite, illite and montmorillonite”, Cement and Concrete Research, 41, p. 113-122, 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2010.09.013
13. Velosa A.L., Rocha F. and Veiga R., “Influence of chemical and mineralogical composition of metakaolin on mortar characteristics”, Acta Geodyn. Geomater., vol. 6, no. 1 (153), p. 121-126, 2009.
14. Bakera A.T. and Alexander M.G., “Use of metakaolin as a supplementary cementitious material in concrete, with a focus on durability properties”, RILEM technical letter, 4, p. 89-102, 2019. doi: 10.21809/rilemtechlett.2019.94
15. Arikan M., Sobolev K., Ertün T., Yeǧinobali A. and Turker P., “Properties of blended cements with thermally activated kaolin”, Construction and Building Materials, 23 (1), p. 62-70, 2009. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.02.008
16. Tironi A., Trezza M.A., Scian A.N. and Irassar E.F., “Kaolinitic calcined clays: Factors affecting its performance as pozzolans”, Construction and Building Materials, 28, p. 276-281, 2012. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.064
17. Grist E.R., Paine K.A., Heath A., Norman J. and Pinder H., “Compressive strength development of binary and ternary lime-pozzolan mortars”, Materials and Design, 52, p. 514-523, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2013.05.006
18. Sujjavanich S., Suwanvitaya P., Chaysuwan D. and Heness G., “Synergistic effect of metakaolin and fly ash on properties of concrete”, Construction and Building Materials, 155, p. 830-837, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.08.072
19. Grilo J., Santos Silva A., Faria P., Gameiro A., Veiga R. and Velosa A., “Mechanical and mineralogical properties of natural hydraulic lime-metakaolin mortars in different curing conditions”, Construction and Building Materials, 51, p. 287-294, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.10.045
20. Aggelakopoulou E., Bakolas A. and Moropoulou A., “Properties of lime–metakolin mortars for the restoration of historic masonries”, Applied Clay Science, 53, p. 15-19, 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.clay.2011.04.005
21. Sobolev K. and Yeǧinobali A., “The development of high-strength mortars with improved thermal and acid resistance”, Cement and Concrete Research, 35 (3), p. 578-583, 2005. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.06.016
22. EN 1015-3, “Methods of test for mortar for masonry- Part 3: Determination of consistence of fresh mortar (by flow table)”, CEN, Brussels, Belgium, 1999.
23. EN 1015-11, “Methods of test for mortar for masonry – Part 11: Determination of flexural and compressive strength of hardened mortar”, CEN, Brussels, Belgium, 1999.
24. Santos A.R., Veiga M.R., Silva A.S., Brito J. and Álvarez J.I., “Evolution of the microstructure of lime based mortars and influence on the mechanical behaviour: The role of the aggregates”, Construction and Building Materials, 187, p. 907-922, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.07.223
25. Wang H., Long G., Paine K.A., Grist E.R., Zeng X., Xie Y. and Ma K., “Study on the hydration product and embodied CO2 of NHL-mineral admixture system based on thermodynamic simulation and experiments”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 353, pp. 131641, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131641
26. Gleize P.J.P, Müller A. and Roman H.R, “Microstructural investigation of a silica fume–cement–lime mortar”, Cement & Concrete Composites, 25, p. 171-175, 2003. doi: 10.1016/S0958-9465(02)00006-9
27. Rigopoulos I., Kyriakou L., Vasiliades M.A., Kyratsi T., Efstathiou A.M. and Ioannou I., “Improving the carbonation of air lime mortars at ambient conditions via the incorporation of ballmilled quarry waste”, Construction and Building Materials, 301, pp. 124073, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124073
28. Zhang Z., Zhang B. and Yan P., “Comparative study of effect of raw and densified silica fume in the paste, mortar and concrete”, Construction and Building Materials, 105, p. 82-93, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.045