2017
DOI: 10.1088/1757-899x/245/3/032017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Porosimetric, Thermal and Strength Tests of Aerated and Nonaerated Concretes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the characterization of the pore structure, mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) was applied. The MIP method is commonly used to characterize the pore structure in porous materials, due to its simplicity, quickness and wide pore diameter measuring range (Strzałkowski and Garbalińska 2017). In order to obtain information about the pore size distribution of the cement matrix, a MIP test was performed on small-cored samples taken from the specimens.…”
Section: Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry (Mip)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the characterization of the pore structure, mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) was applied. The MIP method is commonly used to characterize the pore structure in porous materials, due to its simplicity, quickness and wide pore diameter measuring range (Strzałkowski and Garbalińska 2017). In order to obtain information about the pore size distribution of the cement matrix, a MIP test was performed on small-cored samples taken from the specimens.…”
Section: Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry (Mip)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is common knowledge that the properties of given materials are determined by their internal structure and arrangement of pores, particularly those which can be filled with water in the liquid phase, cf. [7][8][9][10]. Table 2 lists the values of apparent density and moisture content by weight and volume specified for individual water-saturated blocks.…”
Section: Analysis Of the Results Of Strength Tests In Terms Of The Inmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite this, there is a not very strong correlation between the results. The mercury method seems to be effective for pore analysis below 1 um, while in the case of optical analysis, it allows the determination of pore contents larger than 10 um [49,50]. Figure 15 shows the relative weight losses of the tested concretes during the first year of curing.…”
Section: Ref-0mentioning
confidence: 99%