Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
www.fuelfirst.com
Abstract
This paper describes an extensive laboratory-based investigation into the use of unprocessed, run-of-station, low-lime fly ash in foamed
concrete, as a replacement for sand. Foamed concrete with plastic densities ranging between 1000 and 1400 kg/m3 and cube strengths from 1
to 10 N/mm2 were tested. It is shown that by using this type of fly ash in this way can significantly enhance many of the properties of foamed
concrete, including rheology and compressive strength development, whilst providing almost complete immunity to sulfate attack. Given the
high carbon content of this type of fly ash, however, it was found that there was a need to increase greatly the amount of foam required to
achieve the specified design plastic density. However, given the relatively low cost of foam production, this is not likely to have significant
implications for the use of material.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Run-of-station; Low-lime fly ash; Foamed concrete; Filler/sand
1. Introduction
Low emission and flue gas desulfurisation systems
fitted to modern power stations have significantly
changed the characteristics of fly ash arising from coal
combustion. In particular, this has led to higher carbon
contents and a coarser particle size distribution and,
thereby, less pozzolanic reactivity when used in cement
and concrete, which remains one of the most important
end uses for the material. In response, extensive research
and development effort is being directed towards postproduction processing, such as carbon, coarse particles
and ammonia removal, activation etc to enhance the asproduced fly ash. However, these methodologies necessarily add embodied energy to the material and contribute
to greenhouse gas emission, let alone the additional cost
processing entails. Furthermore, there are at present
difficulties with storing and utilising the phases removed
during processing.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C44 1382 344343; fax: C44 1382 344816.
E-mail addresses: m.r.jones@dundee.ac.uk (M.R. Jones),
a.z.mccarthy@dundee.ac.uk (A. McCarthy).
0016-2361/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2004.09.030
1399
2. Experimental programme
2.1. Materials, mix proportions and specimen preparation
The constituent materials used in the laboratory to
produce foamed concrete comprised (i) Portland cement
(PC, conforming to BS 12 42.5N and CEM I to EN 197-1) at
a fixed content of 300 kg/m3, (ii) natural sand, fine
aggregate (conforming to BS 882 Grade F, with particles
greater than 2.36 mm removed by sieving), (iii) coarse fly
ash (designated here FAcoarse, with a 45 mm sieve retention
of 26.0% and conforming to BS 3892-2, BS EN 450 and
ASTM C 618-94a Class F) and (iv) free water to give a
water/cement ratio (w/c) of 0.50. The surfactant used for the
production of the preformed foam was of commercially
available synthetic type.
The mix proportions of the 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3
plastic density foamed concretes, which are summarised in
Table 1, were calculated by equating the design plastic
density value to the sum of solids (cement and fine
aggregate) and water in the mix. However, when FAcoarse
was used as replacement of sand, this was considered within
the w/c ratio to ensure there was sufficient free water
available to wet the large surface area of the FAcoarse
particles [1].
The preformed foam (with a density of 50 kg/m3) was
prepared from a 6% aqueous surfactant solution in a dry
system generator, which is typical of the type used by
industry. The base mix, i.e. PC, water and filler, and
preformed foam were combined in a rotary drum (freefalling action) mixer, following the mixing sequence
reported by Kearsley [2] and Jones et al. [3]. Actual plastic
densities within G50 kg/m3 of the design value were
accepted. The mix was sampled in accordance with BS EN
12350-1 and placed in steel moulds lined with plastic,
kitchen-type cling film, to prevent interaction with mould
release oil. The specimens were then covered with cling film
for 24 h and, following demoulding, were sealed-cured (i.e.
wrapped in cling film and stored in sealed plastic bags at
20G2 8C) until testing.
Table 1
Mix proportions of the 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3 foamed concretes used to prepare the test specimens
Design plastic
densitya, (kg/m3)
Cement type
1000
PC
1200
PC
1400
PC
Fine aggregate
type
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Waterb
Foam
300
300
300
300
300
300
550
750
950
367
500
633
150
333
150
400
150
467
24.9
18.5
21.1
12.8
17.7
7.2
These plastic densities were selected after consultation with industry colleagues and reflect typical range of values. Similarly, it was found that this PC
content was the minimum used by industry.
The FAcoarse was considered in the w/c ratio of 0.50 to ensure there was sufficient water to wet the large surface area of the fine (smaller than 125 mm) fly
ash particles compared to the relatively coarse sand, where this was not necessary.
1400
Table 2
Summary of consistence indices for the 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3 foamed concretes
Test mix
Spread (mm)
3
Brewer Test
BS 4551-1test
1000
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
175
245
145
275
115
280
100
160
95
185
85
210
1200
1400
a
Slump flow
430
570
410
605
405
650
200
15
180
10
190
15
iZ
Dw
;
Ar
(2)
where
DwZincrease in weight with time (g)
AZcross-sectional area (mm2)
rZdensity of water (i.e. 1000 kg/m3)
The performance of foamed concrete in aggressive
chemical environments was examined in terms of length
change and chemical analysis. The former was assessed
using 75!75!225 mm prisms with Demec studs at
150 mm apart, while the latter was carried out on 10 mm
ground slices of 40!40!200 mm prisms with XRD
equipment at 3608 2q, with a step size of 0.18 2q. Length
change measurements were made at designated time
intervals, while the XRD analyses were carried out after
6 months exposure. The Design Sulfate (DS) exposure
classes were as specified in BRE SD1-1 [7], with the
sulfate content achieved by a combination of gypsum
anhydrite with epsomite (50/50% at DS2 and 30/70% at
DS4, respectively).
3. Consistence
The consistence indices of the 1000, 1200 and
1400 kg/m3 foamed concretes, which comprised measurements of spreadability and flowability, are summarised
in Table 2, while the relationships between these are
examined in Figs. 1 and 2.
3.1. Spread
As can be seen in Table 2, the spread values ranged
between 115 and 280 mm, between 85 and 210 mm and
between 405 and 650 mm according to the Brewer, BS
4551-1 and slump flow methodologies, respectively. The
performance ranking of all density concretes remained
constant throughout all spread measurements (reflecting a
good relationship between the fundamental characteristics
measured by the different spread tests), with the minimum
and maximum values observed on the 1400 kg/m3 concretes
with sand and FAcoarse fine aggregates, respectively.
For a given plastic density, the spreads obtained on
FAcoarse concretes were up to 2.5 times greater than those
noted on the sand fine aggregate mixes. The enhanced
consistence of the FAcoarse concretes compared to sand is
likely to be due to a combination of factors, the ball-bearing
effect of FA particles due to their spherical morphology [8];
improved packing of the solid phase and adsorption of mix
water on to the FAcoarse particles reducing inter-particle
friction [1]. As regards the latter, an increase in the mix
water will reduce the yield stress value of concrete [9], and,
in turn, improve spread [5].
Given that the volume of air in the 10001400 kg/m3
density foamed concretes can account for up to half the total
unit volume, it would be expected to have a significant effect
on its fresh properties. From Table 2 it is apparent that, for a
given cement and water content (as is the case with the sand
foamed concretes), the spread value decreased with increasing density. As a result, in order for all sand foamed concretes
to achieve the 200 mm spread benchmark required for
flowing properties [4], higher quantities of mix water would
be necessary for 1400 kg/m3 mix compared to 1000 kg/m3
mix. However, the reverse trends were noted for the FAcoarse
1401
Fig. 1. Relationship between spread measurements according to Brewer [4], BS 4551-1 (initial spread, without vibration) and slump flow tests.
Given the wide range of different spread test methodologies available, the relationship between these on results
obtained on the foamed concretes was examined, as shown
in Fig. 1. Regression analysis of the data proved that good
Fig. 2. Relationship between spread and flow time measurements for the range of foamed concretes.
1402
(3)
(4)
In addition, it was found that the 200 mm spread requirement for flowing concrete according to the Brewer test
method corresponded to minimum spreads of 130 and
500 mm for the BS 4551-1 spread and slump flow test
methods, respectively.
3.2. Flowability out of a modified Marsh cone
The Marsh cone efflux times, which are an indication of
plastic viscosity [5], ranged between 10 and 200 s. As
expected from the spread measurements, enhanced consistence (i.e. lower flow time) was noted when sand was fully
replaced by FAcoarse. Indeed, the flow of the FAcoarse
concretes was rapid and continuous, with efflux times less
than 60 s, which, according to the Dundee ranking method,
is Class 1 [3]. There were significant differences in flow
times between the sand (180200 s) and FAcoarse (1015 s)
mixes, again due to the reduction in internal friction with the
replacement of sand by fly ash. The small variation of flow
times for the 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3 concretes for a
given fine aggregate type, suggests that there is little effect
of plastic density itself on flow time.
A comparison of the Brewer spread and flow time is
given in Fig. 2. As expected, for the range of design plastic
densities considered, at a given cement content and w/c
ratio, greater spread values (hence lower yield stresses)
corresponded to shorter flow times (hence reduced plastic
viscosity), thereby indicating a relationship between these
two properties on foamed concrete. However, for the limited
number of concretes examined and the scatter in the data, no
correlation between plastic viscosity and yield stress could
be derived.
4. Rheology
Measurements of foamed concrete rheology were made
with a Brookfield RVT viscometer on the more fluid
FAcoarse concretes. As expected from the literature [11], the
shape of the speed-torque curve during increasing (upcurve)
and decreasing (downcurve) speed increments, when plotted
on a nonlogarithmic scale, demonstrated that foamed
concrete is thixotropic (due to the build up of a structure
within the material). For a given rotational speed, the torque
measurements differed for the two sections of the curves
(hysteresis effect), indicating that the viscosity at any
1403
Table 3
Comparison between calculated and actual foam quantities and effect on actual free water content
Plastic density
(kg/m3)
Fine aggregate
type
Calc. water
(kg/m3)
Calc. foam
(kg/m3)
Actual foam
(kg/m3)
Actual/calc.
foam
Actual watera,
(kg/m3)
1000
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
150.0
332.5
150.0
405.4
150.0
471.0
23.5
18.5
20.8
12.3
18.7
6.8
23.2
20.9
29.5
30.8
20.4
21.9
0.987
1.130
1.418
2.504
1.091
3.221
149.8
334.3
156.6
419.8
151.3
482.4
0.50
0.50
0.52
0.53
0.50
0.52
1200
1400
a
1404
6. Compressive strength
The sealed-cured 100 mm cube compressive strengths
(up to 56 days) of the mixes are given in Fig. 4. Although the
early age strengths (1 day measurements) were very similar
(around 1.0 N/mm2) for both sand and FAcoarse concretes,
the 28 day values varied significantly with both density and
fine aggregate type. More specifically, the 28 day strengths
of the sand foamed concretes at 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3
were 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 N/mm2, respectively, while the
corresponding strengths of the FAcoarse concretes were
more than three times higher (i.e. 3.9, 5.3 and 7.3 N/mm2).
7. Sorptivity
The one-dimensional sorptivity of foamed concrete was
studied in order to determine its resistance to ingress of
water and any dissolved aggressive ions, if the material were
to be placed in the ground. The sorptivity indices calculated
for the range of foamed concretes examined are summarised
Fig. 4. Compressive strength development of PC foamed concretes at 1000, 1200 and 1400 kg/m3 plastic densities.
Fine aggregate
type
Sorptivity
(mm/min1/2)
FAcoarse/sand
sorptivity ratio
1000
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
Sand
FAcoarse
0.101
0.332
0.075
0.281
0.074
0.501
3.3
1200
1400
3.7
6.8
1405
(6)
Fig. 5. Influence of fines content and 28 day sealed-cured 100 mm cube compressive strength on sorptivity.
1406
Fig. 6. Resistance of 1000 and 1400 kg/m3 foamed concretes to aggressive chemical environments.
1407
Fig. 7. XRD patterns of 1000 and 1400 kg/m3 foamed concretes subjected to DS4 exposure with pHO5.5 and reference (H2O) solution
(E, Ettringite; G, Gypsum; MS, Monosulfate; P, Portlandite; Q, Quartz; L, Larnite; M, Mullite).
2 ),
sulfate products, i.e. gypsum (calcium sulfateCSH
ettringite (calcium sulfo-aluminate hydrateC6 AS 3 H32 )
and monosulfate (calcium aluminum sulfate hydrate
11 ). The XRD patterns obtained are given in
C4 ASH
1408
9. Conclusions
Overall, the replacement of sand with unprocessed runof-station fly ash had a significant beneficial effect on fresh
foamed concrete properties. Indeed, the FAcoarse mixes
exhibited enhanced consistence (greater spreadability and
flowability out of a modified Marsh cone) and rheology
(reduced apparent yield) compared with the sand concretes,
due to differences in the fine aggregate particle shape and
size. However, the FAcoarse concretes required up to three
times more foam than the calculated quantity to achieve the
design plastic density. This was due to foam instability,
possibly due to the highly fluid consistency of the base mix
and the adverse effects of the high residual carbon in the ash.
However, the slightly lower mix stability of the FAcoarse
concretes could potentially be overcome by using lower w/c
ratios than the sand mixes.
The use of fly ash in foamed concrete also significantly
benefited compressive strength development, particularly
after 28 days. At a given age, the FAcoarse concretes were up
to 6 times stronger than those of equivalent sand concretes.
From 28 days to 180 days, the fly ash mixes increased in
sealed-cured compressive strength by up to 2.5 times.
Although the FAcoarse concretes exhibited slightly higher
sorptivities than those of the corresponding sand mixes (due
to the higher volumes of sorbing paste in the former).
However, this did not have an adverse effect on its
performance in aggressive chemical solutions, and the
early indications are that this type of concrete could be
almost immune from attack.
Acknowledgements
The Authors would like to acknowledge the support, in
undertaking this projects of the following organisations:
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions,
Eastern Electricity Ltd, Foamcrete Ltd, MBT Admixtures,
References
[1] Giannakou A, Jones MR. Potential of foamed concrete to enhance the
thermal performance of low-rise dwellings, Innovations and developments in concrete materials and construction. In: Dhir RK, Hewlett PC,
Csetenyi LJ, editors. Proceedings of the international congress
challenges of concrete construction, University of Dundee, Scotland,
511 September 2002. London, Thomas Telford. 2002. p. 53344.
[2] Kearsley EP. The use of foamcrete for affordable development in third
world countries. Appropriate concrete technology. In: Dhir RK,
McCarthy MJ, editors. Proceedings from the international conference,
concrete in the service of mankind, University of Dundee, Scotland,
2728 June 1996. London: E&FN Spon; 1996. p. 23343.
[3] Jones MR, McCarthy MJ, McCarthy A. Moving fly ash
utilisation in concrete forward: a UK perspective. Proceedings
of the 2003 international ash utilization symposium, University
of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy Research, October 20
22 2003.
[4] Brewer WE. In: Dhir RK, Hewlett PC, editors. Proceedings of the
international conference concrete in the service of mankind,
University of Dundee Scotland, 2728 June 1996. Controlled low
strength materials (CLSM), radical concrete technology. London:
E&FN Spon; 1996. p. 65567.
[5] Domone PLJ. The slump flow test for high-workability concrete. Cem
Concr Res 1998;28(2):17782.
[6] Hall C. Water sorptivity of mortars and concretes: a review. Mag Conr
Res 1989;41(147):5161.
[7] Building Research Establishment. Special digest 1 Concrete in
aggressive ground. Part 1: assessing the aggressive chemical
environment 2001.
[8] Agullo L, Toralles-Carbonari B, Gettu R, Aguado A. Fluidity of
cement pastes with mineral admixtures and superplasticizera study
based on the Marsh cone test. Mater Struct 1999;32:47985.
[9] Marrs DL, Bartos PJM. Development and testing of self-compacting
low strength slurries for SIFCON. In: Bartos PJM, Marrs DL,
Cleland DJ, editors. Proceedings of the international RILEM
conference production methods and workability of concrete.
London: E&FN Spon; 1996. p. 199208.
[10] Karl S, Worner J-D. Foamed concretemixing and workability,
workability of special fresh concretes. In: Bartos PJM, editor.
Proceedings of the international RILEM workshop special concretes:
workability and mixing, Paisley, Scotland, 23 March 1993. London:
E&FN Spon; 1994. p. 21724.
[11] Banfill PFG. The rheology of fresh mortar. Mag Conr Res 1991;
43(154):1321.
[12] Brookfield Engineering Laboratories. More solutions to sticky
problems; a guide to getting more from your Brookfield viscometer
1995.
[13] Tattersall GH. Workability and quality control of concrete. London:
E&FN Spon; 1991. p. 262.
[14] Murata J, Suzuki K. New method of testing the flowability of grout.
Mag Conr Res 1997;49(181):26976.
[15] Dhir RK, Jones MR, Nicol LA. Development of Structural Grade
Foamed Concrete, Final Report, DETR Research Contract 39/3/385;
February 1999a. p. 84.
[16] Domone PLJ, Yongmo X, Banfill PFG. Developments of the twopoint workability test for high-performance concrete. Mag Conr Res
1999;51(3):1719.
[17] Bartos PJM. Fresh concrete: properties and tests. London: Elsevier;
1992. p. 292.
1409
[23] Naik TR, Ramme BW. Low-strength concrete and controlled lowstrength material (CLSM) produced with class F fly ash. In:
Adaska WS, editor. Controlled low-strength materials, ACI SP-150.
American Concrete Institute; 1994. p. 113.
[24] Jones MR. On physical characterization of pulverized-fuel ash and its
use in concrete. PhD Thesis. University of Dundee; 1986.
[25] Kearsley EP, Wainwright PJ. Porosity and permeability of foamed
concrete. Cem Concr Res 2001;31:80512.
[26] Nyame BK. Permeability of normal and lightweight mortars. Mag
Concr Res 1985;37(130):448.
[27] McDonald P, Mulheron M. Magnetic resonance imaging and water
transport Network News, Issue 4, EPSRC Engineering Network for
the Application of NMR techniques to improve concrete performance.
2001. p. 2.
[28] Tikalsky PJ, Carrasquillo RL. Influence of fly ash on the sulfate
resistance of concrete. ACI Mater J 1992;89(1):6975.
[29] McCarthy MJ, Dhir K, Jones MR. Benchmarking PFA grouts for
magnesium sulfate bearing exposures. Mater Struct 1998;31:
33542.
[30] Neville AM. Properties of concrete. 4th ed.: Longman; 1995. p. 844.