2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0008-8846(02)00914-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microstructural study of sulfate attack on ordinary and limestone Portland cements at ambient temperature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

11
70
0
5

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 192 publications
(86 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
11
70
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Earlier, when the OPC-based cementitious materials were employed widely as geothermal well-casing cement, which serves in supporting mechanically the metal casing-pipe and in protecting it against corrosion, one serious drawback was their limited resistance to the hot acidic environment created by the combination of concentrated dihydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in geothermal wells. As well documented [5,6], the capacity of OPCs to withstand acid was very poor, and they suffered from severe acid erosion. To deal with this problem, acid-resistant cements had to be developed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Earlier, when the OPC-based cementitious materials were employed widely as geothermal well-casing cement, which serves in supporting mechanically the metal casing-pipe and in protecting it against corrosion, one serious drawback was their limited resistance to the hot acidic environment created by the combination of concentrated dihydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in geothermal wells. As well documented [5,6], the capacity of OPCs to withstand acid was very poor, and they suffered from severe acid erosion. To deal with this problem, acid-resistant cements had to be developed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…e ACI committee (2001) reported several types of chemical attacks such as acid attacks, alkali attacks, chloride ingress, carbonation, and sulfate attacks [1]. All of these chemical attacks deteriorate the overall properties of cementitious materials [2][3][4]. e extensive acid medium makes concrete susceptible to acid attacks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of the results and the conclusions obtained by these authors (26), achieved in base of the following cementitious materials: 1 SRPC, 1 OPC and its 2 POZC with FA+NP (BC1 and BC2) and 1 POZC with NP (BC3), which have been submitted to the both ASTM C 452 (1) and C 1012 (27) methods, these final statements might be debatable only when calcareous fine aggregate instead of the siliceous and graduated one of the ASTM C 778-92a type (28) would have been used, which is mandatory for these two methods. Since the calcareous aggregate, both fine and coarse and their respective filler, facilitates and increases the sulphate attack to concrete, even when the applied cement is SRPC (26,(30)(31)(32), by means of both direct way (33) (in its double aspect: sulphatic hydration stimulation of the C 3 A present in OPC, in this case, by the mixing water that moistens the surface of their particles during initial mixing, and additional calcium tri-mono-and/or hemi-carboaluminate hydrated formation from C 3 A origin of OPC), and indirect way (33), but this time, with no pozzolanic activity, logically (preferential formation of calcium mono-carboaluminate hydrated instead of AFm phase which is transformed ett-vlf (o de origen el C 4 AF del mismo CPO en las mismas circunstancias), debe de ser lógicamente más bien independiente que inter-dependiente o combinada (16)(17)(18).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Puesto que los resultados y conclusiones que obtuvieron de haber ensayado 1 CPO y sus 2 PUZC con FA (BC1 y BC2), 1 PUZC con NP (BC3) y 1 CPRS con dicho método (1) y el método ASTM C 1012 (27), son además muy discutibles, al haber utilizado una arena caliza local en sustitución de la arena silícea graduada tipo ASTM C 778-92a (28), la cual es obligatorio utilizar para ambos métodos de ensayo. Puesto que, como es sabido, el árido calizo, fino y grueso, facilita a la par que aumenta el ataque de los sulfatos al hormigón, y el filler calizo también lo facilita como el propio (26,(30)(31)(32). Tanto por vía directa (33), en su doble vertiente: estimulación de la hidratación selenitosa, en este caso, del C 3 A del CPO, por el agua de amasado que los humedeció inicialmente, y formación adicional con dicho C 3 A de tri-, mono-y/o hemi-carboaluminato de calcio hidratado, como por vía indirecta, pero esta vez, sin actividad puzolánica alguna de por medio, lógicamente (formación preferente de mono-carboaluminato de calcio hidratado en detrimento de Fase AFm que se transforma en ett-lf in ett-lf (33), resulting finally in greater expansion, as logical as well; in addition, it may also be a precursor to thaumasite formation at advanced ages (34), but also not forgetting the non-direct sulphatic hydration stimulation (33) (26) state as a conclusion that "This test method procedure, ASTM C 452-68, may not be an appropriate tool for determination of sulphate resistance of blended cements, since sulfate exposure occurs before the pozzolanic effect", since whether this affirmation was supposedly true, it had also been applicable for the ASTM C 1012 method.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified