ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I express my deep and sincere gratitude to my guide, Smt. Jayasree Ramanujan, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, for the kind co-operation and guidance for the completion of my seminar.I also extend my gratitude to P. G. Coordinator Dr. Laju Kottalil, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, and Prof. Mercy Joseph Poweth, Head of Department, Civil Engineering and all staff members for the valuable support they offered to me. I thankfully acknowledge my parents, my friends and all others who have helped me directly or indirectly for the successful completion of this seminar. Last but not the least I thank The Almighty, for giving me the strength and power to conduct this seminar.

NAJEEB.M

ABSTRACT

Portland-limestone cements (PLC) have been used in practice for a considerable period of time in several countries. In 2008, the CSA A3000 cements committee approved the addition of a new class of cement with up to 15% interground limestone. The main advantage of producing Portland-limestone cement is its contribution to sustainable development. By introducing limestone into cement, the total volume of cement would increase, or in other words, the amount of clinker required to produce a certain amount of cement would decrease. This would result in a substantial amount of energy saving in the production of cement as the consumption of natural raw materials and the fuel needed for production of clinker would be reduced. Moreover, it would contribute to sustainable development due to the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, mostly CO2 and NOx, involved in the pyro processing of clinker. On this basis, the future world production of Portland-limestone cement is expected to increase. Nevertheless, it should be noted that all the aforementioned benefits can only be achieved provided that Portland-limestone cement has similar performance characteristics to Portland cement, and has no adverse effects on the properties of concrete.The properties of Portland-limestone cements have been the subject of numerous studies. Researchers have studied the effect of using Portland-limestone cement with various limestone contents on fresh properties, mechanical properties, and durability of concrete.This seminar paper covers a brief introduction to Portland Limestone Cement, its properties, equivalent strength, equivalent durability and Shrinkage properties

CONTENTSSL NoTITLEPAGENo.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTiABSTRACTiiLIST OF TABLESivLIST OF FIGURESv1INTRODUCTION11.1Initiatives11.2Portland-Limestone Cements21.2.1History31.2.2Current Situation61.2.3Production of Portland Limestone Cement72PROPERTIES OF PORTLAND LIMESTONE CEMENT 82.1Effects of PLC on Concrete93EQUIVALENT DURABILITY PERFORMANCE OF 10PORTLAND LIMESTONE CEMENT3.1Alkali-Silica Reaction113.2Sulphate Resistance133.3Freezing-and-Thawing and Scaling Resistance153.4Carbonation174EQUIVALENT STRENGTH OF PORTLAND 19LIMESTONE CEMENT4.1Materials, Testing, and Results204.2Mechanisms Involved in Equivalent Strength225EARLY-AGE SHRINKAGE BEHAVIOR OF 25PORTLAND LIMESTONE CEMENT5.1Shrinkage Studies255.2Chemical Shrinkage265.3Shrinkage and Cracking276CONCLUSION30REFERENCES31

LIST OF TABLESSl No.NAME OF TABLESPAGE No.

Table 1Typical Properties of PLC9Table 2Results of freezing-and-thawing tests 16(ASTM C666/C666M, Procedure A)Table 3 Typical PC and targets for PLC20Table 4Characteristics of produced cements20Table 5 Mixture design used for concrete testing22Table 6 Concrete Test Results22Table 7Estimation of reacted cement for the three different systems24

LIST OF FIGURESSl NoNAME OF FIGURESPAGE NO

Fig 1CEN Data on types of cement produced in Europe5Fig 2Example fineness trends PLC vs. clinker and limestone 7component fractionsFig 3Concrete prisms stored for 2 years over water at 38C (100F)12Fig 4Mortar bars immersed for 14 days in NaOH solution at 80C13Fig 5Mortar bars immersed for 28 days in NaOH solution at 80C13Fig 6Control mixtures and mixtures with fly ash14Fig 7Control mixtures and mixtures with slag cement15Fig 8Scaling mass loss per ASTM C672/C672M 18Fig 9Depth of carbonation of concrete prisms after 2 years18Fig 10ASTM C109 mortar cube strength results 21Fig 11Illustration of the simple hydration model used23Fig 12Chemical shrinkage plots of OPC, PLC, and PLC-Slag 27mortars at w/b of: (a) 0.39 and (b) 0.34Fig 13Autogenous shrinkage measurements for OPC, PLC, and 28PLC-Slag systems with w/b of: (a) 0.39; and (b) 0.34Fig 14Stress development in the dual-ring tests of mortar 29specimens with w/b values of 0.34 Fig 15Age of cracking in the single ring tests29

iv