Abstract

To improve the mechanical performance and lower the production cost of magnesium oxysulfate cement (MOSC), this article investigates the effects of single and compounded addition of metakaolin (MK) and/or fly ash (FA) on the setting time, mechanical strength, water resistance, hydration product, composition, and microstructure of the resulting cement. MOSC samples with different proportions, ranging from 0 to 30 wt.%, of FA and/or MK substituting magnesium oxide (MgO) were prepared. The microstructure was explored by scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, and mercury intrusion porosimetry. The findings suggest that adding FA can delay the setting of MOSC; however, the effect of adding MK to MOSC was reversed. Furthermore, the phase composition of the MOSC hydration products was unaltered upon adding FA and/or MK, but thicker and longer 517 phase crystals were observed. FA and MK can effectively fill the large pores of MOSC through filling and nucleation effects, reduce the pore size, and form a denser microstructure, thereby improving its mechanical properties. The optimal MOSC sample was found by substituting 10 wt.% of both FA and MK, resulting in a cement that exhibited a short setting time and an incredibly high mechanical strength and density. These findings will further the development of stronger, more cost-efficient, and more water-resistant MOSC products.

Highlights

  • Magnesium oxysulfide cement (MOSC) is an environmentally benign and air-hardening, ternary system that is composed of magnesium oxide (MgO)–MgSO4 –H2 O [1,2,3]

  • The fluidity of C-fly ash (FA) gradually increased as the FA content increased, confirming that the fluidity of MOSC paste can be improved with the addition of FA

  • Content increased, confirming that the fluidity of MOSC paste can be improved with the addition of FA

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Magnesium oxysulfide cement (MOSC) is an environmentally benign and air-hardening, ternary system that is composed of MgO–MgSO4 –H2 O [1,2,3]. MOSC is advantageous due to its faster setting, lighter weight, and greater mechanical strength [4]. Compared to magnesium oxychloride cement (MOC), MOSC does not absorb moisture or return halogens, and it exhibits low corrosion toward steel bars [5]. MOSC is widely used in building structures, walls, and decorative materials, as well as refractory products, and it exhibits excellent performance in its applications [6]. The cost of manufacturing MOSC is significantly higher than that of manufacturing traditional cement, which limits the necessary development of MOSC. MOSC has great potential if the cost can be reduced without compromising its stability and properties

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.