10 Years of Nanocem Research – Some Highlights
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE INDUSTRIAL-ACADEMIC RESEARCH NETWORK ON CEMENT AND CONCRETE 10 years of Nanocem research – some highlights Karen Scrivener, LMC, EPFL Switzerland Background • Until end of 1970s large laboratories PCA, BCA, CERILH, carried out basic work on cementitious materials • Then drastic downsizing / closure of these laboratories • Work in Universities fragmented, small isolated groups • Duplication, reinventing the wheel, no follow through • PhD structure – studies limited to 3 years • Current developments largely empirical and incremental • Recognition that situation has to change • Mounting challenge to decrease environmental footprint Creation of NANOCEM • May 2002: first meeting, 6 partners, Paris • Unsuccessful bid for EU network of excellence • March 2003: Decision to form independent consortium • May 2004: signature of consortium agreement Continuing activity indefinite duration THE INDUSTRIAL-ACACEMIC RESEARCH NETWORK ON CEMENT AND CONCRETE 11 Industrial partners 22 Academic partners An Industrial Academic Partnership for Fundamental Research on Cementitious Materials €s For Partner Core research research projects programme Industrial - academic dialog Areas where lack of understanding or quantitative measurement blocks progress ACADEMIA INDUSTRY of knowledge and processes into new products Long term advance Long term Integration of knowledge Interpretation of knowledge and clarification of possible progress areas How to meet increase in demand 9 Blends based on Portland clinker ↓ CO2 Process optimisation ↓ clinker factor Clinker Gypsum Cement SCMs – Supplementary Cementitious Materials Limestone Fly ash Slag Natural pozzolan Often by-products or wastes from other industries Typical reductions in clinker factor Source: HOLCIM 11 But increasing substitution is reaching a limit due to: - technical performance - availability Metakaolin Calcined clays Figures from ~2000 Rice husk ash Silica fume Burnt shale Used in cement Reserve Natural pozzolana Blast furnace slag Fly ash Fly ash: significant volumes with low performance Cement 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Limestone Mill. tons/year 12 Calcined clay + limestone 100 Combined addition gives better 80 strength than OPC at 7 & 28d for Metakaolin [%] 60 replacement of 45% Limestone [%] ~90% for 60% addition 40 Cement [%] 20 Fast synergetic effect between 0 metakaolin and limestone OPC LS15 MK30 B45 B60 13 In the future sustainability can be increased by 1. Extending the use of current clinker substitutes; 2. The development of novel, cost-effective supplementary cementitious materials and alternative clinkers; 3. Optimizing the use of waste materials as substitutes for clinker and fuel; However such developments can only be successful if we can provide the basis in understanding and performance tests for users to have confidence in the many potential solutions There is no magic bullet solution: sustainability can only come from mastering an increasingly diverse range of cementitious materials The basis for user confidence Can only come (on a reasonable timescale) through : A systematic, science-based understanding of cementitious processes and materials at the nanoscale: Extended across all the scales involved in cement and concrete production to: Provide the multidisciplinary assessment and prediction tools needed to assess the functional and environmental performance of current and new materials. To master new solutions, we need approaches based on mechanisms Composition, Mixing, Time, Temperature, RH, etc THE INDUSTRIAL-ACACEMIC RESEARCH NETWORK ON CEMENT AND CONCRETE Nanoscience of Cementitious Materials: processes occurring at the nano / micro scale determine macroscopic performance <100nm Absorption of Capillary forces in partially C-S-H, superplasticiser saturated pores less than main hydrate phase: molecules on cement 100 nm controls strength, grains: controls shrinkage and durability, etc controls rheology cracking Network Resources ~120 permanent research staff involved ~65 doctoral students Financing of core projects based on industry contribution (~ 750.000 € p. a.) + Umbrella for European projects 2006-2010: ~4 M€: Marie Curie RTN, 15 PhDs + Post docs 2010-2014: ~4 M€: Marie Curie ITN, 15 PhDs Types of project Partner Partner project Partner project project Partner Core Core project Partner project project project Partner Core project project Partner project Partner Partner project project Core projects Core projects aim to bridge the gaps between the independent research of the different academic partners. They typically fund 1-2 PhD students working across 2-4 partner institutions Core projects chosen after workshops process Core projects, completed CP1 (finished, early 2008): Aberdeen + EMPA Phase Assemblages with C-S-H CP2 (finished, Sept 2007): Surrey + Ecole Polytechnique Pore structure by 1H NMR CP3 (finished Feb 2009): ESPCI Paris + Dijon Organo Aluminates CP4 (finished Oct 2009): EPFL, Aarhus, Leeds, DTU Reactivity of cement and SCMs in blended pastes CP5 (finished 2009): Aberdeen, IETCC Madrid Phase formation in Alkali activated systems CP6 (finishing 2013): EPFL Atomistic modelling to study hydrate formation CP7 (finished 2012): TUMunich + Leeds + ZAG “Pre-Hydration” - Reactions before mixing with liquid water Core projects - ongoing CP8 (started Oct 2009): LCPC + Lund Ion transport in partially saturated conditions CP9 (started Jan 2011): EPFL, Aberdeen, Aarhus Influence of mineral additions on Kinetics of hydration CP10 (started Oct 2012): CTU, TUV Micromechanical analysis of blended cement-based composites CP11 (start Oct 2012): Leeds, LCPC Carbonation Behaviour of Low-Clinker Cements CP12 (started Oct 2012): Dijon Influence of the functionalities of organic molecules on the reactivity and hydration kinetics of cement phases CP13 (to start 2013): EMPA, DTU Early age dimensional changes and cracking Highlights 1. Thermodynamic approach to phase assemblages OPC without calcite (w/c = ~0.7) Slide: Barbara Lothenbach 80 pore solution 75 70 65 60 55 50 monosulfate 45 ettringite hemicarbonate 40 hydrotalcite 35 /100 g cement gypsum 3 30 portlandite cm C AF 25 C A 4 3 20 C S 2 C-S-H 15 C S 10 3 5 0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 hydration time [days] Thermodynamic modeling cement reaction hydrates CH Alite Ca2 C3S 2 HSiO24 C-S-H Belite Al ( OH4 ) C S 2 “gypsum” C$.Hx Aluminate OH- Ettringite C3A AFt Limestone 2 Cc SO 4 Ferrite 2 2 SO4 C (A,F) CO3 2 AFm OH CO2 ? 3 Thermodynamics in Nanocem Core Project 1 2004-2006 • Established solid solution ranges for sulfate, carbonate and hydroxy AFm phases • Established coherent database for cement phases • Training course on GEMS model RTN Project 1 2006-2010 • Compiled database of density of phases • Solid solution ranges for chloride, nitrate, nitrite, AFm phases SNSF Sinergia + University Bourgogne 2010-2013 PSI • Aluminium substitution in C-S-H • Absorbtion of alkalis and sulfates • Atomistic modelling Thermodynamics outcomes • Aluminate containing phases as a function of sulfate excess portlandite present in all assemblages ms- metastable 3.5 carbonate AFt +gypsum + calcite • Predicts reaction of limestone with 3.0 aluminate 2.5 -ratio [-] 3 O 2 2.0 AFt + AFt + Mc + calcite • Explains improvement in strength with /Al 3 Hc 1.5 +Ms (ms) 5% limestone additions 1.0 molar bulkSO • New standard for coupled additions of AFt + Hc+ Mc 0.5 MS ss (ms)+ Hc lim. Ms ss SCMs and limestone Hc + C AH (ms) 0.0 4 x 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 molar bulk CO2/Al2O3-ratio [-] • Clearly established that thermodynamics predicts well solid phase assemblage • Thermodynamic model now standard tool Highlights 2. 1H NMR to characterise pore structure Proton NMR Surface physics and chemistry r 10s 1s Free water D T2 100ms 10ms 1ms Water in large pores Non destructive, no need to dry. 100s Many, in-situ measurements on same Water in small pores sample 10s Bound water 1s Proton NMR Core Project 2 2004-2006 • Established T1-T2 technique, information on water exchange RTN project 4 2006-2010 • T2-T2 technique, time of exchange, effect of drying on different populations ITN projects 1, 7 and 9 2010-2014 • Complete quantification of signal, unambiguous assignment of peaks, C-S-H density and evolution during hydration UK-SERC projects 2010-2014 • Modelling of relaxation processes and exchange Core project 2 2D T1 –T2 relaxation correlations Discrete size capillary structures Quarter diagonal: T1=4T2 Gel porosity Exchange Interlayer water McDonald et al., Phys Rev E (2005) Water in Ca(OH)2 11,5 and Ettringite 9,5 28 m. 1.05 6 h. 7,5 4.22 12 h. 5.45 24 h. 5,5 7.02 3d. 8.67 6 d. 3,5 Signal Intensity (a. u.) (a. Signal Intensity 8.72 7d. 1,5 9.53 28 d. 10.04 62 d. -0,5 1,000E-06 1,000E-0510 µs 1,000E-04100 µs 1,000E-031 ms 1,000E-0210 ms 1,000E-010.1 s T2 Relaxation time Is the NMR “Solid” signal a good estimate of the water in crystalline phases? [water fraction in the sample] Age XRD / TGA NMR 0.32 10 days 0.252 0.248 0.32 28 days 0.260 0.258 0.40 10 days 0.225 0.226 0.40 28 days 0.243 0.241 0.48 10 days 0.216 0.207 0.48 28 days 0.224 0.230 Water in Ca(OH)2 11,5 and Ettringite 9,5 28 m. 1.05 6 h. 7,5 4.22 12 h. 5.45 24 h. 5,5 7.02 3d. 8.67 6 d. 3,5 Signal Intensity (a. u.) (a. Signal Intensity 8.72 7d. 1,5 9.53 28 d. Capillary 10.04 62 d. Interlayer water Gel water water -0,5 (1 nm) (3‐4 nm) 1,000E-06 1,000E-05 1,000E-04 1,000E-03 1,000E-02 1,000E-01 10 µs 100 µs 1 ms 10 ms 0.1 s T2 Relaxation time Evolution of pore structures with hydration 1,0 Water in Portlandite 0,9 Interlayer water 0,8 Gel water Capillary water 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 3 nm Signal fraction 0,3