Alkali Silica Reaction Mitigation Using High Volume Class C Fly Ash William Joseph Phillips University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 7-2015 Alkali Silica Reaction Mitigation Using High Volume Class C Fly Ash William Joseph Phillips University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Civil Engineering Commons, and the Transportation Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Phillips, William Joseph, "Alkali Silica Reaction Mitigation Using High Volume Class C Fly Ash" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 1306. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1306 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Alkali Silica Reaction Mitigation Using High Volume Class C Fly Ash A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment Of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Civil Engineering By William J. Phillips Missouri University of Science & Technology Bachelors of Science in Civil Engineering, 2013 July 2015 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council _____________________________ Dr. W. Micah Hale Thesis Director _____________________________ _____________________________ Dr. Ernest Heymsfield Dr. Clinton M. Wood Committee Member Committee Member ABSTRACT Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) is a neutralization reaction that occurs between an acid (silicic acid) and a basic pH pore solution (Calcium Oxide, Potassium Oxide, and Sodium Oxide). ASR causes deleterious expansion within concrete, which can cause durability issues decreasing the life span of concrete. ASR in concrete has been found in increasing quantities since its discovery in 1940 by Stanton. Several cases of ASR have occurred in Arkansas near Fayetteville, Pine Bluff, and Little Rock. The purpose of this research was to develop preventative measures using Class C fly ash in concrete, which contains the moderately reactive aggregates found in the Arkansas River. The research used locally available fly ashes in order to represent the materials used in conjunction with the Arkansas River fine aggregates. The research includes three regional, Class C fly ashes. Two fine aggregate (sand) sources are included in order to evaluate the ability of Class C fly ashes in preventing ASR. The first fine aggregate evaluated was Arkansas River sand from Van Buren, AR. This is a moderately reactive aggregate that was used and is currently used in concrete throughout the region. In addition to the river sand, a highly reactive fine aggregate (Jobe-Newman), was evaluated to determine the ability of Class C fly ashes in preventing ASR when aggregates of different levels of reactivity are used. Jobe-Newman aggregate has been documented by many researchers as a highly reactive source of silica. Class F fly ashes have been previously prescribed for preventing ASR when there is a source of reactive aggregates (ACI Committee 221 1998). However, the availability of Class F fly ash in regions, such as Arkansas, is somewhat limited compared to the availability of Class C fly ash. This research examines the use Class C fly ash for preventing ASR in concretes containing moderately reactive aggregates. Based upon the AMBT results for Arkansas River sand Class C fly ash was found to be able to impede alkali silica reaction to the point of making concrete non-reactive based upon the accelerated mortar bar test as defined by ASTM C1260 and ASTM C1567. Also, based on the accelerated mortar bar test results recommendations were made as to how to better classify fly ashes compared to the current ASTM C618 including placing limits on MgO content and analyzing fly ashes by a ratio of sum of alkalis: sum of oxides instead of simply classifying a fly ash based upon sum of oxides. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First I would like to thank Headwaters for donating the fly ash needed for the testing. Also I would like to thank Matthew Widener, Doddridge Davis, and Sydney Dickson for helping in mixing the specimens and donating their time when they didn’t have to help me. I would also like to thank the two previous people doing research on this subject Cameron Murray and Richard Deschenes Jr. for setting up the ground work for my research. Also I would like to thank all the people at the ENRC who were always willing to help me especially David Peachee who several times gave me good ideas from a different perspective than mine that I truly appreciated. I would like to specifically thank Richard Deschenes Jr. for helping to further my knowledge on ASR whether it involve fly ash, pessimum effects, mechanism, or the general history. Not only did he help me grow in my knowledge, but he was always helpful when I tried to improve our testing apparatuses, when I needed someone to look over my papers, or check calculations. Without his help I would have had a much more difficult time getting accurate results and being able to get to a point where I could submit a thesis. I would like to thank Dr. Micah Hale for always having an open door policy and not only responding during work hours but being patient enough to help me on nights or weekends when I had questions. Moreover his several revisions on my thesis to improve its quality and clarity. Also without him I don’t know if I would have ended up being interested in materials testing enough to take the job I did without working for him on this research. Whenever I had an idea to improve our work conditions he would always be willing to work with me whether it be a new set of forms or a small environmental chamber for the CPT’s. Finally I would like to thank the teachers of the department. I really enjoyed being in a close knit department and being able to learn from the teachers in an enjoyable environment whether the topic be concrete and structures or soils and foundations. I know coming out of school I have a well-rounded education which is priceless. I also appreciate the teachers on my committee, often students forget the amount of time it takes to read through and analyze a thesis that can easily take up time outside of the typical 8 to 5 schedule. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 : INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ..........................................1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Objectives ...............................................................................................................................2 Chapter 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................................3 2.1 ASR Literature .......................................................................................................................3 2.2 ASR Fly Ash Literature ..........................................................................................................5 2.3 ASR Test Methods .................................................................................................................8 2.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................12 Chapter 3 : TESTING PROCEDURE .......................................................................................13 3.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................13 3.2 Materials .............................................................................................................................13 3.2.1 Fine Aggregate ..........................................................................................................14 3.2.2 Coarse Aggregate ......................................................................................................16 3.2.3 Fly Ashes ..................................................................................................................16 3.2.4 Cement ......................................................................................................................19 3.2.5 NaOH ........................................................................................................................19 3.3 Experimental Procedures .....................................................................................................19 3.3.1 AMBT .......................................................................................................................19 3.3.2 CPT ...........................................................................................................................22 Chapter 4 : RESULTS .................................................................................................................24 4.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................24 4.2 AMBT Data ..........................................................................................................................24 4.2.1 AMBT Data for Arkansas River Fine Aggregate .....................................................24 4.2.2 AMBT Data with Jobe Newman ...............................................................................28 4.3 AMBT Chemical Analysis ...................................................................................................31 4.3.1 AMBT Chemical Analysis