Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T14:38:42.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Loading Rate on Cracking of Cement Paste in Compression

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

David Darwin  and
Emmanuel K. Attiogbe
David Darwin
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045
Emmanuel K. Attiogbe
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045
Get access

Abstract

Submicroscopic cracking within cement paste is studied for monotonic and short-term sustained loading. Loading times range from 1.25 minutes to 4 hours. Water cement ratios of 0.3 and 0.5 are used. Specimens are loaded to preselected strains and immediately unloaded. The specimens are then sliced with a diamond saw and viewed in a scanning electron microscope. Crack traces are cataloged based on length, width and orientation. The crack traces are converted to three dimensional crack distributions, which are in turn used to determine the degree of softening due to cracking. The results indicate that for loading to a fixed strain, slow loading results in less cracking than rapid loading. However, at the same stress-strength ratio, rapid loading results in fewer cracks. The results indicate that the role of submicroscopic cracking in the nonlinear behavior of cement paste increases with strain rate.

Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 64: Symposium S – Cement-Based Composites: Strain Rate Effects on Fracture , 1985 , 167
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Hsu, T. C., Slate, F. O., Sturman, G. M., Winter, G., JACI 60 (2), 209–224 (1963).Google Scholar
2. Shah, S. P. and Chandra, S., JACI 65 (9), 770–781 (1968).Google Scholar
3. Shah, S. P. and Chandra, S., JACI 67 (10), 816–824 (1970).Google Scholar
4. Meyers, B. L., Slate, F. O., Winter, G., JACI 66 (1), 60–68 (1969).Google Scholar
5. Derucher, K. N., Building and Environ. 13 (1), 60–68 (1979)Google Scholar
6. Carrasquillo, R. L., Slate, F. O., Nilson, A. H., JACI 78 (3), 179–186 (1981).Google Scholar
7. Shah, S. P. and Winter, G., JACI 63 (9), 925–980 (1966).Google Scholar
8. Spooner, D. C., Mag. Conc. Res. 24 (79), 85–92 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Spooner, D. C. and Dougill, J. W., Mag. Conc. Res. 27 (92), 151–160 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Spooner, D. C., Pomeroy, C. D., Dougill, J. W., Mag. Conc. Res. 28 (94), 21–29 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Maher, A. and Darwin, D., First Int. Conf. Math. Model. (Univ. Missouri-Rolla, 1977) 111, 1705–1714.Google Scholar
12. Cook, D. J. and Chindaprasirt, P., Mag. Conc. Res. 32 (111), 89–100 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Maher, A. and Darwin, D., JACI 79 (2), 100–109 (1982).Google Scholar
14. Attiogbe, E. K. and Darwin, D., SM Report No. 16, Univ. of Kansas Center for Research (1985).Google Scholar
15. Weibel, E. R., Stereological Methods, Vol.2 (Academic Press, New York, 1980).Google Scholar