標準水泥砂漿抗壓強度添加飛灰及爐石粉之最佳用量並以之做混凝土抗壓強度之比較試驗及研究

A study on optimized addition of fly ash and GGBF slag for improvement of standard mortar compression strength and comparison with that of concrete

廖文憶(Wen-Yi Liao)

指導教授 ： 彭添富 ； 林至聰

國立臺北科技大學/工程學院/土木與防災研究所/碩士(2009年)

摘要

近年來由於經濟發展快速，超高樓層日益增加，因此混凝土材料依舊扮演著重要的角色，不論是在主要結構或者次要結構方面，混凝土的使用往往就是數十方甚至數以百方的計量，在這龐大的計量中，混凝土的品質優劣會直接影響結構物的安全，而混凝土之抗壓強度即是直接參考之指標。
本研究是根據中國國家標準CNS61第I型波特蘭水泥製作標準水泥砂漿抗壓試體。其試體為5cm×5cm×5cm正立方體，水泥砂漿試體由等量之標準砂及拌合水製作，且以飛灰及爐石來取代水泥用量，而飛灰及爐石之添加量為膠結材總重之10%、20%、30%及40%，其齡期為7天、28天及90天，求出水泥砂漿抗壓強度最佳之飛灰及爐石添加量。再根據CNS1230製作標準混凝土圓柱抗壓試體，其圓柱為15cm×30cm試體，其強度為280 ，再使用膠結材總重之10%、20%及30%的飛灰與爐石取代水泥用量，齡期為28天及90天，進行混凝土抗壓強度實驗，比對水泥砂漿與混凝土中，飛灰及爐石之最佳添加量是否相近，研究用標準水泥砂漿強度試驗取代混凝土抗壓試驗，求飛灰及爐石最佳用量之可行性。試驗結果顯示，水泥砂漿添加飛灰及爐石之最佳用量與混凝土添加飛灰及爐石之最佳用量相當相似。

關鍵字

飛灰 ； 爐石 ； 水泥砂漿抗壓強度 ； 混凝土抗壓強度

並列摘要

The number of skyscrapers is increasing day after day with the fast development of economy in recent years. Therefore, concrete still remains a major part no matter in primary or secondary structures. The use of concrete is always measured in hundreds or even thousands of tons. With such a massive quantity, the quality of concrete determines the safety of a building, and the compression strength of concrete is a crucial index for direct reference.
Standard mortar compression strength test specimens were prepared as per CNS61 for Type I Portland Cement. The specimens are cubes of 5cm×5cm×5cm. The specimens were prepared with equal amount of standard sand and water, and part of cement was replaced with fly ash and GGBF slag. The additions of fly ash and slag are 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the bonding material for different specimens in 7 days, 28 days and 90 days of age. From these specimens, the optimized addition of fly ash and GGBF slag was found for improvement of mortar compression strength. In addition, cylindrical specimens were prepared as per CNS 1239 for compression tests. The cylinders were 15cm×30cm in dimension with a strength of 280 . Fly ash and GGBF slag equivalent to 10%, 20% and 30% of amount of bonding material were used to replace cement. Specimens of 20 days and 90 days of age were used for concrete compression strength test. The results from mortar and cement tests were made available for comparing if the optimized additions of fly ash and GGBF slag are close. Standard mortar strength test was used to replace concrete compression test in the study for the optimized addition of fly ash and GGBF slag. The results show that the optimized addition of fly ash and GGBF slag in mortars and that in concrete are quite similar.

並列關鍵字

Fly Ash ； GGBF Slag ； Mortar Compression Strength ； Concrete Compression Strength

參考文獻

32. 郭淑德、張玉金，飛灰的利用與發展，財團法人台灣營建研究院，第1頁至第4頁，1997。

5. Majumdar A﹒J﹒﹐K﹒Speakman and K﹒E﹒Fletcher“A Curr-ent Review of Cement Research”﹐Building Research Station Current Paper 4/71﹐Building Research Station﹐England，1971。

6. Mehta,P.K,“Pozzlanic and Cementitious Byproducts as Mineral Admix tures for Concrete－A Critical Review”,Frist Inter-national Conference on the Use of Fly Ash,Silica Fume,Slag and Other Mineral By-products in Concrete, pp.1~46,1983。

10. Regourd M.,J.H. Thomassion,P. Baillif, and J.C. Touray“Blast-Furnace Slag Hydration Surface Analysis”, Cement and Concrete Research,Vol.13, pp.444~457，1983。

12. Wu X.,D. M. Roy,and C. A. Langton，“Early Stage Hy-dration of Slag-Cement,” Cement and Concrete Research , Vol 13, pp.277~286，1983。