Composite cement testing dyckerhoff germany
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 10

Composite Cement Testing Dyckerhoff Germany PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 143 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Composite Cement Testing Dyckerhoff Germany . Denver, June 2012, Heiko Plack. Test Programme. Combinations tested ( varying contents ): Cementitious component : API Class G (medium coarse cement , Blaine 3.100 cm2/g) API Class G + CEM I 42,5 N(medium fine cement , Blaine 3.900 cm2/g)

Download Presentation

Composite Cement Testing Dyckerhoff Germany

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Composite cement testing dyckerhoff germany

Composite CementTesting Dyckerhoff Germany

Denver, June 2012, Heiko Plack


Test programme

Test Programme

  • Combinationstested (varyingcontents):

    Cementitiouscomponent:

    • API Class G (medium coarsecement, Blaine 3.100 cm2/g)

    • API Class G + CEM I 42,5 N(medium finecement, Blaine 3.900 cm2/g)

    • API Class H(coarsecement , Blaine 2.550 cm2/g)

      Additive:

    • Silicaflour

      • Medium fine (Blaine 3.200 cm2/g)

      • Coarse (Blaine 1.000 cm2/g)

    • Natural pozzolan (veryfine, Blaine 8.000 cm2/g)

      • Variationsinclude also changingwater-to-cement/blendratio = slurrydensity

      • Blendsweretestedaccordingtophysical API Spec 10A requirements


Components involved characterization

Components Involved (Characterization)


Discussion of r esults

DiscussionOfResults

  • Assumption (Dyckerhoff proposal): Standardizationeffortstarget on specifying a „basic“ cement, and not a „specialcement“, e.g. lightweightcement (coveredby Lafarge NA proposal)

  • = slurrydensityforperformancetestingis > 1.800 g/cm3

  • Additives do affecttheslurrydensityby

    • theirown absolute densitydifferingfrom Portland cement

    • higherspecificsurfaceareaincreasingthewaterdemand

  • = difficulttospecifythewater-to-cement/blendratio, likeforcurrentbasiccements, G and H

  • However, mostimportantperformancerequirementsidentifiedas

    • Free fluid (slurrystability)

    • Max. consistency 15 – 30‘ („rheology“)

    • Thickening time Schedule 5 („pumping time“)

    • Compressivestrength [email protected] („later“ strength)


Discussion of results conclusion i

DiscussionOfResults – Conclusion (I)

  • Blendsof different cementcomponents (reactivity / fineness) + silicaflourof different finenesshavebeentested (+ a veryfinenaturalpozzolan)

  • Apart fromthecontentofusedcomponentsthewater-to-cement/blendratiohasbeenvariedrespectivelyadjusted.

  • Itis evident that a cementmanufacturerhassufficientdegreeoffreedomtoadjustphysicalperformancepropertiesof a compositecementbyvarying

    • Cement type (reactivity)

    • Additive finenessandcontent

    • Water-to-cement/blendratio


Discussion of results conclusion ii

DiscussionOfResults – Conclusion (II)

  • Thus

    • nomaximumormininimshareof additive istobespecified,

    • nowater-to-cementratioistobespecified,

    • instead, a slurrydensityrangeistobespecifiedforperformancetesting


Conclusion suggestion i lafarge na proposal

Conclusion / Suggestion (I) - Lafarge NA proposal

Suggestion tospecifytwonew API Spec 10A Composite CementClasseswiththefollowingphysicalrequirements:

  • Composite cement#1 (API Class E?) → Lafarge NA results / proposal:

    • Additives: Pozzolanic (natural + artificial), listofmaterialstobedefined!

    • Slurrydensityforperformancetesting: 12,0 lb/gal< SG < 16,7 lb/gal

    • Free fluid: < 5,9%

    • API Schedule 5 thickening time: TT > 90‘

    • Max. consistency 15 – 30‘:< 30 Bc

    • [email protected]:> 500 psi

      NochemicalrequirementstobespecifiedforbothnewClasses!


Conclusion suggestions ii dyckerhoff proposal

Conclusion / Suggestions (II) – Dyckerhoff proposal

  • Composite cement#2 (API Class F?) → Dyckerhoff results / proposal

    • Consideredas a „basiccement“

    • Additives: Silicaflour + Pozzolans

    • Slurrydensityforperformancetesting: 15,0 lb/gal< SG < 16,7 lb/gal

    • Free fluid: < 5,9%

    • API Schedule 5 thickening time: 90‘ < TT < 120‘ (130‘?)

    • Compressivestrength [email protected]:> 1.000 psi

      Nochemicalrequirementstobespecified !

      However, classificationas HSR grade possibleif

  • Portland clinkerusedcomplieswith HSR requirementsofClasses G/H


Conclusion suggestions iii

Conclusion / Suggestions(III)

  • Specifyingslurrydensityrequires a referenceto API RP 10B forthetestmethod. Mudbalancesusuallyavailableat all cementmanufacturer‘slabs, calculationfrom absolute densitiesofcomponentsmay also beconsidered.

  • Requirementtoprovidetestreportalongwithanyordershallstate:

    • Slurrydensityatwhichperformancetestswereconducted

    • Water-to-cement/blendratioatwhichperformancetestswereconducted

    • Share of Portland cementrespectivelyof additive

    • Type of additive (silicaflour, fly ash, naturalpozzolan)

    • + resultsofphysicaltestingasspecified (seeabove)

    • Chemical specification ???


Test results

Test Results


  • Login