Common Materials Used in Lateral Load Hardware

Seismic Retrofit Techniques for Foundation Repair

Steel is one of the most prevalent materials in the construction industry, particularly when it comes to lateral load hardware, due to its exceptional properties, diverse applications, and relatively good corrosion resistance. Known for its strength and durability, steels high tensile strength makes it ideal for resisting forces that cause lateral movement in structures like buildings and bridges. Checking your foundation might be less exciting than browsing social media, but significantly more relevant to your financial future basement foundation repair Naperville sump. This robustness is critical in areas prone to seismic activity or high winds where lateral loads can be significant.


The properties of steel that make it suitable for such applications include its ability to withstand both compressive and tensile stresses without significant deformation until reaching its yield point. This ductility allows steel components to deform plastically under extreme conditions, providing a warning before failure, which is crucial for safety in structural design. Additionally, steels versatility in fabrication means it can be shaped into various forms such as beams, columns, and connectors tailored specifically for lateral load resistance.


In terms of applications within lateral load hardware, steel is used in elements like moment-resisting frames, braced frames, shear walls with steel plate sheathing, and various connection devices like bolts and welds that must transfer forces effectively. For example, in a braced frame system designed to resist wind or earthquake loads, steel braces are integral as they distribute the lateral forces throughout the structure in a controlled manner.


Corrosion resistance is another vital aspect when considering steel for long-term use outdoors or in harsh environments. While untreated steel rusts when exposed to moisture and oxygen, modern techniques like galvanizing or applying protective coatings significantly enhance its lifespan. Galvanization involves coating the steel with zinc, which sacrifices itself by corroding first, thereby protecting the underlying steel. Alternatively, painting with epoxy or other protective layers can also serve this purpose. These treatments ensure that even after years of exposure to weather elements or salty air near coastlines, the integrity of the steel components remains intact.


However, despite these advantages, engineers must also consider environmental impacts during production and disposal of steel products due to its energy-intensive manufacturing process. Nonetheless, when balanced against its performance characteristics and lifecycle cost-effectiveness in construction projects requiring robust lateral load resistance solutions, steel continues to be a preferred material choice across many industries globally.

Seismic Retrofit Techniques for Foundation Repair

Lateral Load Considerations in Foundation Stabilization

Lets talk about epoxy polymers – those workhorses we often find playing a critical role in lateral load hardware. Think brackets, connectors, and other bits and pieces that are constantly fighting against the forces trying to push a structure sideways. What makes epoxy so popular in these applications boils down to two key things: its impressive bonding strength and its darn good chemical stability.


When we talk about bonding strength, were talking about epoxys ability to stubbornly stick to other materials. This is crucial because lateral load hardware needs to be securely anchored. Epoxys adhesive properties allow it to create incredibly strong bonds with metals, concrete, and even wood. This means the hardware can effectively transfer loads without shearing or coming loose – a pretty important feature when a building is swaying in the wind or enduring seismic activity.


Now, lets consider chemical stability. Lateral load hardware isnt always living in a pristine, climate-controlled environment. It might be exposed to moisture, salts, temperature fluctuations, and a whole host of other potentially corrosive nasties. Epoxy polymers are generally resistant to these kinds of environmental attacks. They dont readily degrade, dissolve, or weaken when exposed to these elements, which ensures a long service life for the hardware. This robustness is a major advantage over other materials that might be cheaper but less durable in the long run.


So, while you might not think about it much, epoxy polymers are silently and reliably contributing to the structural integrity of buildings through their use in lateral load hardware. Their combination of high bonding strength and chemical resistance makes them an ideal choice for these demanding applications, providing a secure and durable connection that can withstand the test of time and the elements.

Integrating Seismic and Lateral Load Retrofits with Existing Foundations

Carbon fiber composites have emerged as a revolutionary material in the realm of lateral load hardware, offering high-strength alternatives to traditional materials like steel and aluminum. Known for their exceptional strength-to-weight ratio, carbon fiber composites are composed of carbon fibers embedded within a polymer matrix, typically epoxy. This combination results in a material that is not only lighter than its metallic counterparts but also incredibly strong and durable.


In applications where lateral loads are a concern-such as in construction, aerospace, and automotive industries-the use of carbon fiber composites can significantly enhance performance. The reduced weight of these materials allows for more efficient designs; for example, in construction cranes or scaffolding, lighter components mean less energy is required to move them, leading to increased efficiency and reduced wear on machinery.


Moreover, carbon fiber composites exhibit excellent resistance to corrosion and fatigue, which are critical factors when dealing with lateral forces that can induce stress over time. Unlike metals that might degrade under constant strain or exposure to harsh environments, carbon fiber maintains its integrity, providing long-term reliability.


The anisotropic nature of carbon fiber composites allows engineers to tailor the materials properties by aligning the fibers in specific directions to optimize strength where its most needed. This customization is particularly beneficial in lateral load applications where directional forces need precise handling. For instance, in seismic retrofitting projects where structures must withstand horizontal shaking forces, strategically placed carbon fiber reinforcements can provide targeted reinforcement without adding unnecessary bulk.


However, the adoption of carbon fiber composites isnt without challenges. The initial cost can be higher than conventional materials due to the complexity of manufacturing processes. Yet, when considering lifecycle costs-including maintenance and potential replacements-the investment often pays off due to the materials longevity and performance advantages.


In summary, carbon fiber composites represent a sophisticated choice for lateral load hardware due to their unique blend of lightness, strength, durability, and design flexibility. As technology advances and production becomes more cost-effective, these materials are poised to become even more prevalent in applications demanding robust solutions against lateral forces.

Integrating Seismic and Lateral Load Retrofits with Existing Foundations

Case Studies of Successful Foundation Retrofit Projects

Concrete stands as a pivotal material in construction, particularly when considering its role in managing lateral loads through reinforcement and load distribution. In the context of lateral load hardware, concretes versatility is enhanced by its ability to work in conjunction with various reinforcing elements, primarily steel. This synergy not only fortifies the structure against forces that act horizontally but also ensures a balanced distribution of these loads across the buildings framework.


Reinforcement within concrete typically involves embedding steel bars or mesh, known as rebar or reinforcing mesh, which significantly boosts the tensile strength of what would otherwise be a brittle material. When it comes to lateral loads—forces like wind, seismic activity, or even soil pressure—these reinforcements are crucial. They create a composite action where the concrete takes on compressive forces while the steel handles tension, forming a robust system capable of withstanding lateral stresses without failure.


The design of this reinforcement is meticulously planned to optimize load distribution. Engineers use strategic placement of rebar to ensure that forces are not concentrated in any single area but spread out evenly. This is especially important at points where lateral load hardware such as shear walls, moment frames, or bracing systems connect with the concrete structure. Here, additional reinforcement might be added to handle increased stress concentrations.


Moreover, the concept of load distribution in concrete structures goes beyond mere reinforcement placement. It involves understanding how different parts of a building interact under load; for instance, how floors distribute loads to walls and then to foundations. In buildings subjected to significant lateral forces, techniques like using tie beams or coupling beams can help distribute these loads more effectively across multiple structural elements.


In summary, when discussing common materials used in lateral load hardware, concretes effectiveness is largely due to its partnership with steel reinforcement and thoughtful engineering for load distribution. This combination not only provides resilience against lateral pressures but also contributes to the overall stability and longevity of structures facing dynamic environmental challenges.

Okay, so were talking lateral load hardware, the stuff that helps keep buildings from swaying too much in the wind or crumbling during an earthquake. And within that world, wood, surprisingly, still plays a role. It might not be the first thing that pops into your head when you think of high-tech seismic bracing, but wood offers some unique advantages, and of course, some serious challenges.


Think about it: wood is relatively lightweight compared to steel or concrete, which can be a plus in certain applications, especially when youre trying to minimize the overall weight of a structure. Plus, its a renewable resource, a big deal these days. You might see it used in shear walls, for example, where properly framed and sheathed wood panels resist lateral forces. Or perhaps in some specialized connections or damping systems.


But heres the rub: wood is susceptible to decay. Thats where "Applications and Treatments for Decay Prevention" becomes super important. If youre going to use wood in a lateral load-resisting system, you absolutely have to protect it from moisture, insects, and fungal attack. Were talking meticulous construction details that keep water out, proper ventilation to prevent moisture buildup, and often, some kind of preservative treatment. Pressure-treated lumber is a common option, where chemicals are forced into the wood under pressure to make it resistant to rot. There are also borate treatments and other less toxic alternatives gaining popularity.


The specific treatment you choose depends on the environment, the species of wood, and the specific application. Is it exposed to the elements? Is it in contact with the ground? These factors all influence the risk of decay. Neglecting these considerations is a recipe for disaster. A rotted wood component in a lateral load system is basically a weak link, and during a seismic event, that weakness could lead to catastrophic failure.


So, while wood can be a viable material in some lateral load applications, its crucial to understand its limitations and to implement robust decay prevention strategies. Its not just about slapping some lumber together; its about careful planning, proper construction techniques, and ongoing maintenance to ensure that the wood can do its job and keep the building safe for years to come.

Okay, so were talking about fasteners – screws, bolts, nails, the unsung heroes holding things together, especially when lateral loads are involved. Think earthquakes, wind, even just someone leaning a little too hard. When were picking these guys, and figuring out how much they can handle, the material theyre made of is a huge deal.


For lateral load hardware, you often see steel taking the lead. Steels got that great combination of strength and ductility, meaning it can take a beating and bend a little before snapping. Thats important when things are shaking; you want something that can absorb energy, not just shatter. Different grades of steel will have different load capacities, so you gotta check the specs. Galvanized steel is popular too, because it resists corrosion, which is a big plus, especially if youre outdoors or near the coast.


Then youve got stainless steel, the fancy option. More expensive, yeah, but its basically immune to rust. Great for super harsh environments or when you just really need things to last. Again, different stainless steel alloys have different strengths, so dont assume all stainless is created equal.


Sometimes youll see aluminum, especially where weight is a concern. But aluminum is generally weaker than steel, so its usually used in lighter-duty applications or where corrosion resistance is paramount and high strength isnt critical for lateral load.


Finally, dont forget about things like wood screws. Theyre often used in conjunction with steel connectors, and the type of wood theyre going into matters just as much as the screw itself. Soft woods like pine will have a lower holding capacity than hardwoods like oak or maple.


Ultimately, choosing the right fastener material and figuring out its load capacity is all about understanding the specific job it needs to do, the environment its in, and doing your homework. You cant just grab any old screw and hope for the best, especially when safety is on the line. Read the specs, consult with an engineer if youre unsure, and make sure youre using the right tool for the right job. Its worth the effort to avoid a disaster later on.

Okay, lets talk about geosynthetics. When were dealing with lateral loads – think retaining walls, steep slopes, or even just trying to keep soil from sliding around in a construction project – we often need to give the earth a little helping hand. Thats where geosynthetics come in, specifically for soil reinforcement and stabilization.


Imagine a retaining wall. Without some extra support, the soil behind it is constantly pushing outwards, trying to topple the wall. Geosynthetics, often made from tough polymers like polyester or polypropylene, act like internal tendons or reinforcing bars within the soil. Theyre strategically placed within the soil mass and essentially grab onto the soil particles. This creates a composite material – soil plus geosynthetic – thats much stronger and more resistant to those lateral pressures. They essentially increase the soils tensile strength.


Think of it like this: youre building a sandcastle. Without anything to hold it together, it crumbles easily. But if you mixed some straw or fibers into the sand, it would be much more stable. Geosynthetics do the same thing, but on a much larger and more engineered scale.


Now, there are different types of geosynthetics for different jobs. Geogrids, for example, are grid-like structures with large apertures that allow soil particles to interlock, creating a strong connection. Geotextiles, which are fabric-like, can act as filters, separators, and also provide reinforcement. And then you have things like geocomposites that combine different functions into one product.


The beauty of geosynthetics is their versatility and durability. Theyre relatively easy to install, can be tailored to specific site conditions, and are resistant to degradation in the soil environment. This makes them a cost-effective and environmentally sound alternative to traditional methods like massive concrete retaining walls in many situations. They help us build structures that are stronger, more stable, and that last longer. So, next time you see a retaining wall or a reinforced slope, remember the unsung heroes hidden beneath the surface: the geosynthetics working hard to keep everything in place.

In engineering, a structure is the aspect of a structure which links it to the ground or more seldom, water (similar to floating frameworks), moving lots from the framework to the ground. Foundations are typically taken into consideration either shallow or deep. Foundation design is the application of soil mechanics and rock technicians (geotechnical engineering) in the layout of structure aspects of structures.

.

 

Tail of a radio-controlled helicopter, made of CFRP

Carbon fiber-reinforced polymers (American English), carbon-fibre-reinforced polymers (Commonwealth English), carbon-fiber-reinforced plastics, carbon-fiber reinforced-thermoplastic (CFRP, CRP, CFRTP), also known as carbon fiber, carbon composite, or just carbon, are extremely strong and light fiber-reinforced plastics that contain carbon fibers. CFRPs can be expensive to produce, but are commonly used wherever high strength-to-weight ratio and stiffness (rigidity) are required, such as aerospace, superstructures of ships, automotive, civil engineering, sports equipment, and an increasing number of consumer and technical applications.[1][2][3][4]

The binding polymer is often a thermoset resin such as epoxy, but other thermoset or thermoplastic polymers, such as polyester, vinyl ester, or nylon, are sometimes used.[4] The properties of the final CFRP product can be affected by the type of additives introduced to the binding matrix (resin). The most common additive is silica, but other additives such as rubber and carbon nanotubes can be used.

Carbon fiber is sometimes referred to as graphite-reinforced polymer or graphite fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP is less common, as it clashes with glass-(fiber)-reinforced polymer).

Properties

[edit]

CFRP are composite materials. In this case the composite consists of two parts: a matrix and a reinforcement. In CFRP the reinforcement is carbon fiber, which provides its strength. The matrix is usually a thermosetting plastic, such as polyester resin, to bind the reinforcements together.[5] Because CFRPs consist of two distinct elements, the material properties depend on these two elements.

Reinforcement gives CFRPs their strength and rigidity, measured by stress and elastic modulus respectively. Unlike isotropic materials like steel and aluminum, CFRPs have directional strength properties. The properties of a CFRP depend on the layouts of the carbon fiber and the proportion of the carbon fibers relative to the polymer.[6] The two different equations governing the net elastic modulus of composite materials using the properties of the carbon fibers and the polymer matrix can also be applied to carbon fiber reinforced plastics.[7] The rule of mixtures for the equal strain case gives:

which is valid for composite materials with the fibers oriented parallel to the applied load. is the total composite modulus, and are the volume fractions of the matrix and fiber respectively in the composite, and and are the elastic moduli of the matrix and fibers respectively.[7] The other extreme case of the elastic modulus of the composite with the fibers oriented transverse to the applied load can be found using the inverse rule of mixtures for the equal stress case:[7]

The above equations give an upper and lower bound on the Young's modulus for CFRP and there are many other factors that influence the true value.

The fracture toughness of carbon fiber reinforced plastics is governed by multiple mechanisms:

  • Debonding between the carbon fiber and polymer matrix.
  • Fiber pull-out.
  • Delamination between the CFRP sheets.[8]

Typical epoxy-based CFRPs exhibit virtually no plasticity, with less than 0.5% strain to failure. Although CFRPs with epoxy have high strength and elastic modulus, the brittle fracture mechanics presents unique challenges to engineers in failure detection since failure occurs catastrophically.[8] As such, recent efforts to toughen CFRPs include modifying the existing epoxy material and finding alternative polymer matrix. One such material with high promise is PEEK, which exhibits an order of magnitude greater toughness with similar elastic modulus and tensile strength.[8] However, PEEK is much more difficult to process and more expensive.[8]

Despite their high initial strength-to-weight ratios, a design limitation of CFRPs are their lack of a definable fatigue limit. This means, theoretically, that stress cycle failure cannot be ruled out. While steel and many other structural metals and alloys do have estimable fatigue or endurance limits, the complex failure modes of composites mean that the fatigue failure properties of CFRPs are difficult to predict and design against; however emerging research has shed light on the effects of low velocity impacts on composites.[9] Low velocity impacts can make carbon fiber polymers susceptible to damage.[9][10][11] As a result, when using CFRPs for critical cyclic-loading applications, engineers may need to design in considerable strength safety margins to provide suitable component reliability over its service life.

Environmental effects such as temperature and humidity can have profound effects on the polymer-based composites, including most CFRPs. While CFRPs demonstrate excellent corrosion resistance, the effect of moisture at wide ranges of temperatures can lead to degradation of the mechanical properties of CFRPs, particularly at the matrix-fiber interface.[12] While the carbon fibers themselves are not affected by the moisture diffusing into the material, the moisture plasticizes the polymer matrix.[8] This leads to significant changes in properties that are dominantly influenced by the matrix in CFRPs such as compressive, interlaminar shear, and impact properties.[13] The epoxy matrix used for engine fan blades is designed to be impervious against jet fuel, lubrication, and rain water, and external paint on the composites parts is applied to minimize damage from ultraviolet light.[8][14]

Carbon fibers can cause galvanic corrosion when CFRP parts are attached to aluminum or mild steel but not to stainless steel or titanium.[15]

CFRPs are very hard to machine, and cause significant tool wear. The tool wear in CFRP machining is dependent on the fiber orientation and machining condition of the cutting process. To reduce tool wear various types of coated tools are used in machining CFRP and CFRP-metal stack.[1]

Manufacturing

[edit]
Carbon fiber reinforced polymer

The primary element of CFRPs is a carbon filament; this is produced from a precursor polymer such as polyacrylonitrile (PAN), rayon, or petroleum pitch. For synthetic polymers such as PAN or rayon, the precursor is first spun into filament yarns, using chemical and mechanical processes to initially align the polymer chains in a way to enhance the final physical properties of the completed carbon fiber. Precursor compositions and mechanical processes used during spinning filament yarns may vary among manufacturers. After drawing or spinning, the polymer filament yarns are then heated to drive off non-carbon atoms (carbonization), producing the final carbon fiber. The carbon fibers filament yarns may be further treated to improve handling qualities, then wound onto bobbins.[16] From these fibers, a unidirectional sheet is created. These sheets are layered onto each other in a quasi-isotropic layup, e.g. 0°, +60°, or −60° relative to each other.

From the elementary fiber, a bidirectional woven sheet can be created, i.e. a twill with a 2/2 weave. The process by which most CFRPs are made varies, depending on the piece being created, the finish (outside gloss) required, and how many of the piece will be produced. In addition, the choice of matrix can have a profound effect on the properties of the finished composite.[17]

Many CFRP parts are created with a single layer of carbon fabric that is backed with fiberglass.[18] A tool called a chopper gun is used to quickly create these composite parts. Once a thin shell is created out of carbon fiber, the chopper gun cuts rolls of fiberglass into short lengths and sprays resin at the same time, so that the fiberglass and resin are mixed on the spot.[19] The resin is either external mix, wherein the hardener and resin are sprayed separately, or internal mixed, which requires cleaning after every use. Manufacturing methods may include the following:

Molding

[edit]

One method of producing CFRP parts is by layering sheets of carbon fiber cloth into a mold in the shape of the final product. The alignment and weave of the cloth fibers is chosen to optimize the strength and stiffness properties of the resulting material. The mold is then filled with epoxy and is heated or air-cured. The resulting part is very corrosion-resistant, stiff, and strong for its weight. Parts used in less critical areas are manufactured by draping cloth over a mold, with epoxy either pre-impregnated into the fibers (also known as pre-preg) or "painted" over it. High-performance parts using single molds are often vacuum-bagged and/or autoclave-cured, because even small air bubbles in the material will reduce strength. An alternative to the autoclave method is to use internal pressure via inflatable air bladders or EPS foam inside the non-cured laid-up carbon fiber.

Vacuum bagging

[edit]

For simple pieces of which relatively few copies are needed (one or two per day), a vacuum bag can be used. A fiberglass, carbon fiber, or aluminum mold is polished and waxed, and has a release agent applied before the fabric and resin are applied, and the vacuum is pulled and set aside to allow the piece to cure (harden). There are three ways to apply the resin to the fabric in a vacuum mold.

The first method is manual and called a wet layup, where the two-part resin is mixed and applied before being laid in the mold and placed in the bag. The other one is done by infusion, where the dry fabric and mold are placed inside the bag while the vacuum pulls the resin through a small tube into the bag, then through a tube with holes or something similar to evenly spread the resin throughout the fabric. Wire loom works perfectly for a tube that requires holes inside the bag. Both of these methods of applying resin require hand work to spread the resin evenly for a glossy finish with very small pin-holes.

A third method of constructing composite materials is known as a dry layup. Here, the carbon fiber material is already impregnated with resin (pre-preg) and is applied to the mold in a similar fashion to adhesive film. The assembly is then placed in a vacuum to cure. The dry layup method has the least amount of resin waste and can achieve lighter constructions than wet layup. Also, because larger amounts of resin are more difficult to bleed out with wet layup methods, pre-preg parts generally have fewer pinholes. Pinhole elimination with minimal resin amounts generally require the use of autoclave pressures to purge the residual gases out.

Compression molding

[edit]

A quicker method uses a compression mold, also commonly known as carbon fiber forging. This is a two (male and female), or multi-piece mold, usually made out of aluminum or steel and more recently 3D printed plastic. The mold components are pressed together with the fabric and resin loaded into the inner cavity that ultimately becomes the desired component. The benefit is the speed of the entire process. Some car manufacturers, such as BMW, claimed to be able to cycle a new part every 80 seconds. However, this technique has a very high initial cost since the molds require CNC machining of very high precision.

Filament winding

[edit]

For difficult or convoluted shapes, a filament winder can be used to make CFRP parts by winding filaments around a mandrel or a core.

Cutting

[edit]

Carbon fiber-reinforced pre-pregs and dry carbon fiber textiles require precise cutting methods to maintain material integrity and reduce defects such as fiber pull-out, delamination and fraying of the cutting edge. CNC digital cutting systems equipped with drag and oscillating are often used to cut carbon fiber pre-pregs, and rotating knives are commonly used to process carbon fiber fabrics. Ultrasonic cutting is another method to cut CFRP pre-pregs and is particularly effective in reducing delamination by minimizing mechanical stress during the cutting process. Waterjet cutting can be the preferred method for thicker and multilayered polymer composites.[20]

Applications

[edit]

Applications for CFRPs include the following:

Aerospace engineering

[edit]
An Airbus A350 with carbon fiber themed livery. Composite materials are used extensively throughout the A350.

The Airbus A350 XWB is 53% CFRP[21] including wing spars and fuselage components, overtaking the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, for the aircraft with the highest weight ratio for CFRP at 50%.[22] It was one of the first commercial aircraft to have wing spars made from composites. The Airbus A380 was one of the first commercial airliners to have a central wing-box made of CFRP and the first with a smoothly contoured wing cross-section instead of partitioning it span-wise into sections. This flowing, continuous cross section optimises aerodynamic efficiency.[citation needed] Moreover, the trailing edge, along with the rear bulkhead, empennage, and un-pressurised fuselage are made of CFRP.[23]

However, delays have pushed order delivery dates back because of manufacturing problems. Many aircraft that use CFRPs have experienced delays with delivery dates due to the relatively new processes used to make CFRP components, whereas metallic structures are better understood. A recurrent problem is the monitoring of structural ageing, for which new methods are required, due to the unusual multi-material and anisotropic[24][25][26] nature of CFRPs.[27]

In 1968 a Hyfil carbon-fiber fan assembly was in service on the Rolls-Royce Conways of the Vickers VC10s operated by BOAC.[28]

Specialist aircraft designers and manufacturers Scaled Composites have made extensive use of CFRPs throughout their design range, including the first private crewed spacecraft Spaceship One. CFRPs are widely used in micro air vehicles (MAVs) because of their high strength-to-weight ratio.

Airbus then moved to adopt CFRTP, because it can be reshaped and reprocessed after forming, can be manufactured faster, has higher impact resistance, is recyclable and remoldable, and has lower processing costs.[29]

Automotive engineering

[edit]
Citroën SM that won 1971 Rally of Morocco with carbon fiber wheels
1996 McLaren F1 – first carbon fiber body shell
McLaren MP4 (MP4/1), first carbon fiber F1 car

CFRPs are extensively used in high-end automobile racing.[30] The high cost of carbon fiber is mitigated by the material's unsurpassed strength-to-weight ratio, and low weight is essential for high-performance automobile racing. Race-car manufacturers have also developed methods to give carbon fiber pieces strength in a certain direction, making it strong in a load-bearing direction, but weak in directions where little or no load would be placed on the member. Conversely, manufacturers developed omnidirectional carbon fiber weaves that apply strength in all directions. This type of carbon fiber assembly is most widely used in the "safety cell" monocoque chassis assembly of high-performance race-cars. The first carbon fiber monocoque chassis was introduced in Formula One by McLaren in the 1981 season. It was designed by John Barnard and was widely copied in the following seasons by other F1 teams due to the extra rigidity provided to the chassis of the cars.[31]

Many supercars over the past few decades have incorporated CFRPs extensively in their manufacture, using it for their monocoque chassis as well as other components.[32] As far back as 1971, the Citroën SM offered optional lightweight carbon fiber wheels.[33][34]

Use of the material has been more readily adopted by low-volume manufacturers who used it primarily for creating body-panels for some of their high-end cars due to its increased strength and decreased weight compared with the glass-reinforced polymer they used for the majority of their products.

Civil engineering

[edit]

CFRPs have become a notable material in structural engineering applications. Studied in an academic context as to their potential benefits in construction, CFRPs have also proved themselves cost-effective in a number of field applications strengthening concrete, masonry, steel, cast iron, and timber structures. Their use in industry can be either for retrofitting to strengthen an existing structure or as an alternative reinforcing (or prestressing) material instead of steel from the outset of a project.

Retrofitting has become the increasingly dominant use of the material in civil engineering, and applications include increasing the load capacity of old structures (such as bridges, beams, ceilings, columns and walls) that were designed to tolerate far lower service loads than they are experiencing today, seismic retrofitting, and repair of damaged structures. Retrofitting is popular in many instances as the cost of replacing the deficient structure can greatly exceed the cost of strengthening using CFRP.[35]

Applied to reinforced concrete structures for flexure, the use of CFRPs typically has a large impact on strength (doubling or more the strength of the section is not uncommon), but only moderately increases stiffness (as little as 10%). This is because the material used in such applications is typically very strong (e.g., 3 GPa ultimate tensile strength, more than 10 times mild steel) but not particularly stiff (150 to 250 GPa elastic modulus, a little less than steel, is typical). As a consequence, only small cross-sectional areas of the material are used. Small areas of very high strength but moderate stiffness material will significantly increase strength, but not stiffness.

CFRPs can also be used to enhance shear strength of reinforced concrete by wrapping fabrics or fibers around the section to be strengthened. Wrapping around sections (such as bridge or building columns) can also enhance the ductility of the section, greatly increasing the resistance to collapse under dynamic loading. Such 'seismic retrofit' is the major application in earthquake-prone areas, since it is much more economic than alternative methods.

If a column is circular (or nearly so) an increase in axial capacity is also achieved by wrapping. In this application, the confinement of the CFRP wrap enhances the compressive strength of the concrete. However, although large increases are achieved in the ultimate collapse load, the concrete will crack at only slightly enhanced load, meaning that this application is only occasionally used. Specialist ultra-high modulus CFRP (with tensile modulus of 420 GPa or more) is one of the few practical methods of strengthening cast iron beams. In typical use, it is bonded to the tensile flange of the section, both increasing the stiffness of the section and lowering the neutral axis, thus greatly reducing the maximum tensile stress in the cast iron.

In the United States, prestressed concrete cylinder pipes (PCCP) account for a vast majority of water transmission mains. Due to their large diameters, failures of PCCP are usually catastrophic and affect large populations. Approximately 19,000 miles (31,000 km) of PCCP were installed between 1940 and 2006. Corrosion in the form of hydrogen embrittlement has been blamed for the gradual deterioration of the prestressing wires in many PCCP lines. Over the past decade, CFRPs have been used to internally line PCCP, resulting in a fully structural strengthening system. Inside a PCCP line, the CFRP liner acts as a barrier that controls the level of strain experienced by the steel cylinder in the host pipe. The composite liner enables the steel cylinder to perform within its elastic range, to ensure the pipeline's long-term performance is maintained. CFRP liner designs are based on strain compatibility between the liner and host pipe.[36]

CFRPs are more costly materials than commonly used their counterparts in the construction industry, glass fiber-reinforced polymers (GFRPs) and aramid fiber-reinforced polymers (AFRPs), though CFRPs are, in general, regarded as having superior properties. Much research continues to be done on using CFRPs both for retrofitting and as an alternative to steel as reinforcing or prestressing materials. Cost remains an issue and long-term durability questions still remain. Some are concerned about the brittle nature of CFRPs, in contrast to the ductility of steel. Though design codes have been drawn up by institutions such as the American Concrete Institute, there remains some hesitation among the engineering community about implementing these alternative materials. In part, this is due to a lack of standardization and the proprietary nature of the fiber and resin combinations on the market.

Carbon-fiber microelectrodes

[edit]

Carbon fibers are used for fabrication of carbon-fiber microelectrodes. In this application typically a single carbon fiber with diameter of 5–7 μm is sealed in a glass capillary.[37] At the tip the capillary is either sealed with epoxy and polished to make carbon-fiber disk microelectrode or the fiber is cut to a length of 75–150 μm to make carbon-fiber cylinder electrode. Carbon-fiber microelectrodes are used either in amperometry or fast-scan cyclic voltammetry for detection of biochemical signalling.

Sports goods

[edit]
A carbon-fiber and Kevlar canoe (Placid Boatworks Rapidfire at the Adirondack Canoe Classic)

CFRPs are now widely used in sports equipment such as in squash, tennis, and badminton racquets, sport kite spars, high-quality arrow shafts, hockey sticks, fishing rods, surfboards, high end swim fins, and rowing shells. Amputee athletes such as Jonnie Peacock use carbon fiber blades for running. It is used as a shank plate in some basketball sneakers to keep the foot stable, usually running the length of the shoe just above the sole and left exposed in some areas, usually in the arch.

Controversially, in 2006, cricket bats with a thin carbon-fiber layer on the back were introduced and used in competitive matches by high-profile players including Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey. The carbon fiber was claimed to merely increase the durability of the bats, but it was banned from all first-class matches by the ICC in 2007.[38]

A CFRP bicycle frame weighs less than one of steel, aluminum, or titanium having the same strength. The type and orientation of the carbon-fiber weave can be designed to maximize stiffness in required directions. Frames can be tuned to address different riding styles: sprint events require stiffer frames while endurance events may require more flexible frames for rider comfort over longer periods.[39] The variety of shapes it can be built into has further increased stiffness and also allowed aerodynamic tube sections. CFRP forks including suspension fork crowns and steerers, handlebars, seatposts, and crank arms are becoming more common on medium as well as higher-priced bicycles. CFRP rims remain expensive but their stability compared to aluminium reduces the need to re-true a wheel and the reduced mass reduces the moment of inertia of the wheel. CFRP spokes are rare and most carbon wheelsets retain traditional stainless steel spokes. CFRPs also appear increasingly in other components such as derailleur parts, brake and shifter levers and bodies, cassette sprocket carriers, suspension linkages, disc brake rotors, pedals, shoe soles, and saddle rails. Although strong and light, impact, over-torquing, or improper installation of CFRP components has resulted in cracking and failures, which may be difficult or impossible to repair.[40][41]

Other applications

[edit]
Dunlop "Max-Grip" carbon fiber guitar picks. Sizes 1mm and Jazz III.
Dunlop "Max-Grip" carbon fiber guitar picks. Sizes 1mm and Jazz III.

The fire resistance of polymers and thermo-set composites is significantly improved if a thin layer of carbon fibers is moulded near the surface because a dense, compact layer of carbon fibers efficiently reflects heat.[42]

Strandberg Boden Plini neck-thru & bolt on versions that both utilize carbon fiber reinforcement strips to maintain rigidity.

CFRPs are being used in an increasing number of high-end products that require stiffness and low weight, these include:

  • Musical instruments, including violin bows; guitar picks, guitar necks (fitted with carbon fiber rods), pickguards/scratchplates; drum shells; bagpipe chanters; piano actions; and entire musical instruments such as carbon fiber cellos, violas, and violins, acoustic guitars and ukuleles; also, audio components such as turntables and loudspeakers.
  • Firearms use it to replace certain metal, wood, and fiberglass components but many of the internal parts are still limited to metal alloys as current reinforced plastics are unsuitable.
  • High-performance drone bodies and other radio-controlled vehicle and aircraft components such as helicopter rotor blades.
  • Lightweight poles such as: tripod legs, tent poles, fishing rods, billiards cues, walking sticks, and high-reach poles such as for window cleaning.
  • Dentistry, carbon fiber posts are used in restoring root canal treated teeth.
  • Railed train bogies for passenger service. This reduces the weight by up to 50% compared to metal bogies, which contributes to energy savings.[43]
  • Laptop shells and other high performance cases.
  • Carbon woven fabrics.[44][45]
  • Archery: carbon fiber arrows and bolts, stock (for crossbows) and riser (for vertical bows), and rail.
  • As a filament for the 3D fused deposition modeling printing process,[46] carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (polyamide-carbon filament) is used for the production of sturdy but lightweight tools and parts due to its high strength and tear length.[47]
  • District heating pipe rehabilitation, using a CIPP method.

Disposal and recycling

[edit]

The key aspect of recycling fiber-reinforced polymers is preserving their mechanical properties while successfully recovering both the thermoplastic matrix and the reinforcing fibers. CFRPs have a long service lifetime when protected from the sun. When it is time to decommission CFRPs, they cannot be melted down in air like many metals. When free of vinyl (PVC or polyvinyl chloride) and other halogenated polymers, CFRPs recycling processes can be categorized into four main approaches: mechanical, thermal, chemical, and biological. Each method offers distinct advantages in terms of material or energy recovery, contributing to sustainability efforts in composite waste management.

Process Matrix recovery Fiber recovery Degradation of Mechanical Properties Advantages/Drawbacks
Mechanical X X X +No use of hazardous chemical substances  +No gas emissions  +Low-cost energy needed  +Big volumes can be recycled

-Poor bonding between fiber/matrix -Fibers can damage the equipment

Chemical   X   +Long clean fibers +Retention of mechanical properties +Sometimes there is high recovery of the matrix

-Expensive equipment -Possible use of hazardous solvent

Thermal   X X +Fiber length retention +No use of hazardous chemical substances +better mechanical properties than mechanical approach +Matrix used to produce energy

-Recovered fiber properties highly influenced by process parameters -some processes have no recovery of matrix material

Mechanical Recycling

[edit]

The mechanical process primarily involves grinding, which breaks down composite materials into pulverulent charges and fibrous reinforcements. This method is focused on both the thermoplastic and filler material recovery; however, this process shortens the fibers dramatically. Just as with downcycled paper, the shortened fibers cause the recycled material to be weaker than the original material. There are still many industrial applications that do not need the strength of full-length carbon fiber reinforcement. For example, chopped reclaimed carbon fiber can be used in consumer electronics, such as laptops. It provides excellent reinforcement of the polymers used even if it lacks the strength-to-weight ratio of an aerospace component.[48]

Electro fragmentation

[edit]

This method consists in shredding CFRP by pulsed electrical discharges. Initially developed to extract crystals and precious stones from mining rocks, it is now expected to be developed for composites. The material is placed in a vessel containing water and two electrodes. The high voltage electrical pulse generated between the electrodes (50-200 kV) fragments the material into smaller pieces.[49] The inconvenient of this technique is that the energy consumed is 2.6 times the one of a mechanical route making it not economically competitive in terms of energy saving and needs further investigation.

Thermal Recycling

[edit]

Thermal processes include several techniques such as incineration, thermolysis, pyrolysis, gasification, fluidized bed processing, and cement plant utilization. This processes imply the recovery of the fibers by the removal of the resin by volatilizing it, leading to by-products such as gases, liquids or inorganic matter.[50]

Oxidation in fluidized bed

[edit]

This technique consists in exposing the composite to a hot and oxygen-rich flow, in which it is combusted (450–550 °C, 840–1,020 °F) . The working temperature is selected in function of the matrix to be decomposed, to limit damages of the fibers. After a shredding step to 6-20 mm size, the composite is introduced into a bed of silica sand, on a metallic mesh, in which the resin will be decomposed into oxidized molecules and fiber filaments. These components will be carried up with the air stream while heavier particles will sink in the bed. This last point is a great advantage for contaminated end-of-life products, with painted surfaces, foam cores or metal insert. A cyclone enables the recovery of fibers of length ranging between 5 and 10 mm and with very little contamination . The matrix is fully oxidized in a second burner operating at approximatively 1,000 °C (1,850 °F) leading to energy recovery and a clean flue gas.[51]

Chemical Recycling

[edit]

The chemical recycling of CFRPs involves using a reactive solvent at relatively low temperatures (below 350°C) to break down the resin while leaving the fibers intact for reuse. The solvent degrades the composite matrix into smaller molecular fragments (oligomer), and depending on the chosen solvent system, various processing parameters such as temperature, pressure, and catalysts can be adjusted to optimize the process. The solvent, often combined with co-solvents or catalysts, penetrates the composite and breaks specific chemical bonds, resulting in recovered monomers from the resin and clean, long fibers with preserved mechanical properties. The required temperature and pressure depend on the type of resin, with epoxy resins generally needing higher temperatures than polyester resins. Among the different reactive mediums studied, water is the most commonly used due to its environmental benefits. When combined with alkaline catalysts, it effectively degrades many resins, while acidic catalysts are used for more resistant polymers. Other solvents, such as ethanol, acetone, and their mixtures, have also been explored for this process.

Despite its advantages, this method has some limitations. It requires specialized equipment capable of handling corrosive solvents, hazardous chemicals, and high temperatures or pressures, especially when operating under supercritical conditions. While extensively researched at the laboratory scale, industrial adoption remains limited, with the technology currently reaching a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 4 for carbon fiber recycling.[52]

Dissolution Process

[edit]

The dissolution process is a method used to recover both the polymer matrix and fibers from thermoplastic composites without breaking chemical bonds. Unlike solvolysis, which involves the chemical degradation of the polymer, dissolution simply dissolves the polymer chains into a solvent, allowing for material recovery in its original form. An energy analysis of the process indicated that dissolution followed by evaporation was more energy-efficient than precipitation. Additionally, avoiding precipitation helped minimize polymer loss, improving overall material recovery efficiency. This method offers a promising approach for sustainable recycling of thermoplastic composites.[53]

Biological Recycling

[edit]

The biological process, though still under development, focuses on biodegradation and composting. This method holds promise for bio-based and agro-composites, aiming to create an environmentally friendly end-of-life solution for these materials. As research advances, biological recycling may offer an effective means of reducing plastic composite waste in a sustainable manner.[54]

Carbon nanotube reinforced polymer (CNRP)

[edit]

In 2009, Zyvex Technologies introduced carbon nanotube-reinforced epoxy and carbon pre-pregs.[55] Carbon nanotube reinforced polymer (CNRP) is several times stronger and tougher than typical CFRPs and is used in the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II as a structural material for aircraft.[56] CNRP still uses carbon fiber as the primary reinforcement,[57] but the binding matrix is a carbon nanotube-filled epoxy.[58]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Nguyen, Dinh; Abdullah, Mohammad Sayem Bin; Khawarizmi, Ryan; Kim, Dave; Kwon, Patrick (2020). "The effect of fiber orientation on tool wear in edge-trimming of carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) laminates". Wear. 450–451. Elsevier B.V: 203213. doi:10.1016/j.wear.2020.203213. ISSN 0043-1648. S2CID 214420968.
  2. ^ Geier, Norbert; Davim, J. Paulo; Szalay, Tibor (1 October 2019). "Advanced cutting tools and technologies for drilling carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites: A review". Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing. 125: 105552. doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2019.105552. hdl:10773/36722.
  3. ^ Dransfield, Kimberley; Baillie, Caroline; Mai, Yiu-Wing (1 January 1994). "Improving the delamination resistance of CFRP by stitching—a review". Composites Science and Technology. 50 (3): 305–317. doi:10.1016/0266-3538(94)90019-1.
  4. ^ a b Kudo, Natsuko; Fujita, Ryohei; Oya, Yutaka; Sakai, Takenobu; Nagano, Hosei; Koyanagi, Jun (30 June 2023). "Identification of invisible fatigue damage of thermosetting epoxy resin by non-destructive thermal measurement using entropy generation". Advanced Composite Materials. 33 (2): 233–249. doi:10.1080/09243046.2023.2230687. ISSN 0924-3046.
  5. ^ Kopeliovich, Dmitri. "Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites". Archived from the original on 14 May 2012.. substech.com
  6. ^ Corum, J. M.; Battiste, R. L.; Liu, K. C; Ruggles, M. B. (February 2000). "Basic Properties of Reference Crossply Carbon-Fiber Composite, ORNL/TM-2000/29, Pub57518" (PDF). Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 December 2016.
  7. ^ a b c Courtney, Thomas (2000). Mechanical Behavior of Materials. United States of America: Waveland Press, Inc. pp. 247–249. ISBN 1-57766-425-6.
  8. ^ a b c d e f Chawla, Krishan (2013). Composite Materials. United States of America: Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-74364-6.
  9. ^ a b Liao, Binbin; Wang, Panding; Zheng, Jinyang; Cao, Xiaofei; Li, Ying; Ma, Quanjin; Tao, Ran; Fang, Daining (1 September 2020). "Effect of double impact positions on the low velocity impact behaviors and damage interference mechanism for composite laminates". Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing. 136: 105964. doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.105964. ISSN 1359-835X.
  10. ^ Ma, Binlin; Cao, Xiaofei; Feng, Yu; Song, Yujian; Yang, Fei; Li, Ying; Zhang, Deyue; Wang, Yipeng; He, Yuting (15 February 2024). "A comparative study on the low velocity impact behavior of UD, woven, and hybrid UD/woven FRP composite laminates". Composites Part B: Engineering. 271: 111133. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2023.111133. ISSN 1359-8368.
  11. ^ Aminakbari, Nariman; Kabir, Mohammad Zaman; Rahai, Alireza; Hosseinnia, Amirali (1 January 2024). "Experimental and Numerical Evaluation of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Consecutive Low-Velocity Impact Loading". International Journal of Civil Engineering. 22 (1): 145–156. Bibcode:2024IJCE...22..145A. doi:10.1007/s40999-023-00883-9. ISSN 2383-3874.
  12. ^ Ray, B. C. (1 June 2006). "Temperature effect during humid ageing on interfaces of glass and carbon fibers reinforced epoxy composites". Journal of Colloid and Interface Science. 298 (1): 111–117. Bibcode:2006JCIS..298..111R. doi:10.1016/j.jcis.2005.12.023. PMID 16386268.
  13. ^ Almudaihesh, Faisel; Holford, Karen; Pullin, Rhys; Eaton, Mark (1 February 2020). "The influence of water absorption on unidirectional and 2D woven CFRP composites and their mechanical performance". Composites Part B: Engineering. 182: 107626. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107626. ISSN 1359-8368. S2CID 212969984. Archived from the original on 1 October 2021. Retrieved 1 October 2021.
  14. ^ Guzman, Enrique; Cugnoni, Joël; Gmür, Thomas (May 2014). "Multi-factorial models of a carbon fibre/epoxy composite subjected to accelerated environmental ageing". Composite Structures. 111: 179–192. doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.12.028.
  15. ^ Yari, Mehdi (24 March 2021). "Galvanic Corrosion of Metals Connected to Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers". corrosionpedia.com. Archived from the original on 24 June 2021. Retrieved 21 June 2021.
  16. ^ "How is it Made". Zoltek. Archived from the original on 19 March 2015. Retrieved 26 March 2015.
  17. ^ Syed Mobin, Syed Mobin; Azgerpasha, Shaik (2019). "Tensile Testing on Composite Materials (CFRP) with Adhesive" (PDF). International Journal of Emerging Science and Engineering. 5 (12): 6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 August 2022. Retrieved 21 August 2022 – via IJESE.
  18. ^ Glass Companies, Molded Fiber (2018), Technical Design Guide for FRP Composite Products and Parts (PDF), vol. 1, p. 25, archived from the original (PDF) on 21 August 2022, retrieved 21 August 2022
  19. ^ Unknown, Chris (22 January 2020). "Composite Manufacturing Methods". Explore Composites!. Archived from the original on 21 August 2022. Retrieved 21 August 2022.
  20. ^ "Cutting of Fiber-Reinforced Composites: Overview". Sollex. 6 March 2025. Retrieved 31 March 2025.
  21. ^ "Taking the lead: A350XWB presentation" (PDF). EADS. December 2006. Archived from the original on 27 March 2009.
  22. ^ "AERO – Boeing 787 from the Ground Up". Boeing. 2006. Archived from the original on 21 February 2015. Retrieved 7 February 2015.
  23. ^ Pora, Jérôme (2001). "Composite Materials in the Airbus A380 – From History to Future" (PDF). Airbus. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 February 2015. Retrieved 7 February 2015.
  24. ^ Machado, Miguel A.; Antin, Kim-Niklas; Rosado, Luís S.; Vilaça, Pedro; Santos, Telmo G. (November 2021). "High-speed inspection of delamination defects in unidirectional CFRP by non-contact eddy current testing". Composites Part B: Engineering. 224: 109167. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109167.
  25. ^ Machado, Miguel A.; Antin, Kim-Niklas; Rosado, Luís S.; Vilaça, Pedro; Santos, Telmo G. (July 2019). "Contactless high-speed eddy current inspection of unidirectional carbon fiber reinforced polymer". Composites Part B: Engineering. 168: 226–235. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.12.021.
  26. ^ Antin, Kim-Niklas; Machado, Miguel A.; Santos, Telmo G.; Vilaça, Pedro (March 2019). "Evaluation of Different Non-destructive Testing Methods to Detect Imperfections in Unidirectional Carbon Fiber Composite Ropes". Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation. 38 (1). doi:10.1007/s10921-019-0564-y. ISSN 0195-9298.
  27. ^ Guzman, Enrique; Gmür, Thomas (dir.) (2014). A Novel Structural Health Monitoring Method for Full-Scale CFRP Structures (PDF) (Thesis). EPFL PhD thesis. doi:10.5075/epfl-thesis-6422. Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 June 2016.
  28. ^ "Engines". Flight International. 26 September 1968. Archived from the original on 14 August 2014.
  29. ^ Szondy, David (28 March 2025). "Airbus previews next-gen airliner with bird-inspired wings". New Atlas. Retrieved 7 April 2025.
  30. ^ "Red Bull's How To Make An F1 Car Series Explains Carbon Fiber Use: Video". motorauthority. 25 September 2013. Archived from the original on 29 September 2013. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
  31. ^ Henry, Alan (1999). McLaren: Formula 1 Racing Team. Haynes. ISBN 1-85960-425-0.
  32. ^ Howard, Bill (30 July 2013). "BMW i3: Cheap, mass-produced carbon fiber cars finally come of age". Extreme Tech. Archived from the original on 31 July 2015. Retrieved 31 July 2015.
  33. ^ Petrány, Máté (17 March 2014). "Michelin Made Carbon Fiber Wheels For Citroën Back In 1971". Jalopnik. Archived from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 31 July 2015.
  34. ^ L:aChance, David (April 2007). "Reinventing the Wheel Leave it to Citroën to bring the world's first resin wheels to market". Hemmings. Archived from the original on 6 September 2015. Retrieved 14 October 2015.
  35. ^ Ismail, N. "Strengthening of bridges using CFRP composites." najif.net.
  36. ^ Rahman, S. (November 2008). "Don't Stress Over Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe Failures". Opflow Magazine. 34 (11): 10–15. Bibcode:2008Opflo..34k..10R. doi:10.1002/j.1551-8701.2008.tb02004.x. S2CID 134189821. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015.
  37. ^ Pike, Carolyn M.; Grabner, Chad P.; Harkins, Amy B. (4 May 2009). "Fabrication of Amperometric Electrodes". Journal of Visualized Experiments (27). doi:10.3791/1040. PMC 2762914. PMID 19415069.
  38. ^ "ICC and Kookaburra Agree to Withdrawal of Carbon Bat". NetComposites. 19 February 2006. Archived from the original on 28 September 2018. Retrieved 1 October 2018.
  39. ^ "Carbon Technology". Look Cycle. Archived from the original on 30 November 2016. Retrieved 30 November 2016.
  40. ^ "The Perils of Progress". Bicycling Magazine. 16 January 2012. Archived from the original on 23 January 2013. Retrieved 16 February 2013.
  41. ^ "Busted Carbon". Archived from the original on 30 November 2016. Retrieved 30 November 2016.
  42. ^ Zhao, Z.; Gou, J. (2009). "Improved fire retardancy of thermoset composites modified with carbon nanofibers". Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 10 (1): 015005. Bibcode:2009STAdM..10a5005Z. doi:10.1088/1468-6996/10/1/015005. PMC 5109595. PMID 27877268.
  43. ^ "Carbon fibre reinforced plastic bogies on test". Railway Gazette. 7 August 2016. Archived from the original on 8 August 2016. Retrieved 9 August 2016.
  44. ^ Lomov, Stepan V.; Gorbatikh, Larissa; Kotanjac, Željko; Koissin, Vitaly; Houlle, Matthieu; Rochez, Olivier; Karahan, Mehmet; Mezzo, Luca; Verpoest, Ignaas (February 2011). "Compressibility of carbon woven fabrics with carbon nanotubes/nanofibres grown on the fibres" (PDF). Composites Science and Technology. 71 (3): 315–325. doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.11.024.
  45. ^ Hans, Kreis (2 July 2014). "Carbon woven fabrics". compositesplaza.com. Archived from the original on 2 July 2018. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  46. ^ Ali Nahran, Shakila; Saharudin, Mohd Shahneel; Mohd Jani, Jaronie; Wan Muhammad, Wan Mansor (2022). "The Degradation of Mechanical Properties Caused by Acetone Chemical Treatment on 3D-Printed PLA-Carbon Fibre Composites". In Ismail, Azman; Dahalan, Wardiah Mohd; Öchsner, Andreas (eds.). Design in Maritime Engineering. Advanced Structured Materials. Vol. 167. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 209–216. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89988-2_16. ISBN 978-3-030-89988-2. S2CID 246894534.
  47. ^ "Polyamid CF Filament – 3D Druck mit EVO-tech 3D Druckern" [Polyamide CF Filament – 3D printing with EVO-tech 3D printers] (in German). Austria: EVO-tech. Archived from the original on 30 April 2019. Retrieved 4 June 2019.
  48. ^ Schinner, G.; Brandt, J.; Richter, H. (1 July 1996). "Recycling Carbon-Fiber-Reinforced Thermoplastic Composites". Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials. 9 (3): 239–245. doi:10.1177/089270579600900302. ISSN 0892-7057.
  49. ^ Roux, Maxime; Eguémann, Nicolas; Dransfeld, Clemens; Thiébaud, Frédéric; Perreux, Dominique (1 March 2017). "Thermoplastic carbon fibre-reinforced polymer recycling with electrodynamical fragmentation: From cradle to cradle". Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials. 30 (3): 381–403. doi:10.1177/0892705715599431. ISSN 0892-7057.
  50. ^ Bernatas, Rebecca; Dagréou, Sylvie; Despax-Ferreres, Auriane; Barasinski, Anaïs (2021). "Recycling of fiber reinforced composites with a focus on thermoplastic composites". Cleaner Engineering and Technology. 5: 100272. Bibcode:2021CEngT...500272B. doi:10.1016/j.clet.2021.100272.
  51. ^ Naqvi, S. R.; Prabhakara, H. Mysore; Bramer, E. A.; Dierkes, W.; Akkerman, R.; Brem, G. (1 September 2018). "A critical review on recycling of end-of-life carbon fibre/glass fibre reinforced composites waste using pyrolysis towards a circular economy". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 136: 118–129. Bibcode:2018RCR...136..118N. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.013. ISSN 0921-3449.
  52. ^ Zhang, Jin; Chevali, Venkata S.; Wang, Hao; Wang, Chun-Hui (15 July 2020). "Current status of carbon fibre and carbon fibre composites recycling". Composites Part B: Engineering. 193: 108053. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108053. ISSN 1359-8368.
  53. ^ Cousins, Dylan S.; Suzuki, Yasuhito; Murray, Robynne E.; Samaniuk, Joseph R.; Stebner, Aaron P. (1 February 2019). "Recycling glass fiber thermoplastic composites from wind turbine blades". Journal of Cleaner Production. 209: 1252–1263. Bibcode:2019JCPro.209.1252C. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.286. ISSN 0959-6526.
  54. ^ Bernatas, Rebecca; Dagreou, Sylvie; Despax-Ferreres, Auriane; Barasinski, Anaïs (1 December 2021). "Recycling of fiber reinforced composites with a focus on thermoplastic composites". Cleaner Engineering and Technology. 5: 100272. Bibcode:2021CEngT...500272B. doi:10.1016/j.clet.2021.100272. ISSN 2666-7908.
  55. ^ "Zyvex Performance Materials Launch Line of Nano-Enhanced Adhesives that Add Strength, Cut Costs" (PDF) (Press release). Zyvex Performance Materials. 9 October 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 October 2012. Retrieved 26 March 2015.
  56. ^ Trimble, Stephen (26 May 2011). "Lockheed Martin reveals F-35 to feature nanocomposite structures". Flight International. Archived from the original on 30 May 2011. Retrieved 26 March 2015.
  57. ^ Pozegic, T. R.; Jayawardena, K. D. G. I.; Chen, J-S.; Anguita, J. V.; Ballocchi, P.; Stolojan, V.; Silva, S. R. P.; Hamerton, I. (1 November 2016). "Development of sizing-free multi-functional carbon fibre nanocomposites". Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing. 90: 306–319. doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.07.012. hdl:1983/9e3d463c-20a8-4826-89f6-759e950f43e6. ISSN 1359-835X. S2CID 137846813. Archived from the original on 1 October 2021. Retrieved 1 October 2021.
  58. ^ "AROVEX™ Nanotube Enhanced Epoxy Resin Carbon Fiber Prepreg – Material Safety Data Sheet" (PDF). Zyvex Performance Materials. 8 April 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 October 2012. Retrieved 26 March 2015.
[edit]

 

 

Cement powder in a bag, ready to be mixed with aggregates and water.[1]
Cement block construction examples from the Multiplex Manufacturing Company of Toledo, Ohio, in 1905

A cement is a binder, a chemical substance used for construction that sets, hardens, and adheres to other materials to bind them together. Cement is seldom used on its own, but rather to bind sand and gravel (aggregate) together. Cement mixed with fine aggregate produces mortar for masonry, or with sand and gravel, produces concrete. Concrete is the most widely used material in existence and is behind only water as the planet's most-consumed resource.[2]

Cements used in construction are usually inorganic, often lime- or calcium silicate-based, and are either hydraulic or less commonly non-hydraulic, depending on the ability of the cement to set in the presence of water (see hydraulic and non-hydraulic lime plaster).

Hydraulic cements (e.g., Portland cement) set and become adhesive through a chemical reaction between the dry ingredients and water. The chemical reaction results in mineral hydrates that are not very water-soluble. This allows setting in wet conditions or under water and further protects the hardened material from chemical attack. The chemical process for hydraulic cement was found by ancient Romans who used volcanic ash (pozzolana) with added lime (calcium oxide).

Non-hydraulic cement (less common) does not set in wet conditions or under water. Rather, it sets as it dries and reacts with carbon dioxide in the air. It is resistant to attack by chemicals after setting.

The word "cement" can be traced back to the Ancient Roman term opus caementicium, used to describe masonry resembling modern concrete that was made from crushed rock with burnt lime as binder.[3] The volcanic ash and pulverized brick supplements that were added to the burnt lime, to obtain a hydraulic binder, were later referred to as cementum, cimentum, cäment, and cement. In modern times, organic polymers are sometimes used as cements in concrete.

World production of cement is about 4.4 billion tonnes per year (2021, estimation),[4][5] of which about half is made in China, followed by India and Vietnam.[4][6]

The cement production process is responsible for nearly 8% (2018) of global CO2 emissions,[5] which includes heating raw materials in a cement kiln by fuel combustion and release of CO2 stored in the calcium carbonate (calcination process). Its hydrated products, such as concrete, gradually reabsorb atmospheric CO2 (carbonation process), compensating for approximately 30% of the initial CO2 emissions.[7]

Chemistry

[edit]

Cement materials can be classified into two distinct categories: hydraulic cements and non-hydraulic cements according to their respective setting and hardening mechanisms. Hydraulic cement setting and hardening involves hydration reactions and therefore requires water, while non-hydraulic cements only react with a gas and can directly set under air.

Hydraulic cement

[edit]
Clinker nodules produced by sintering at 1450 °C

By far the most common type of cement is hydraulic cement, which hardens by hydration (when water is added) of the clinker minerals. Hydraulic cements (such as Portland cement) are made of a mixture of silicates and oxides, the four main mineral phases of the clinker, abbreviated in the cement chemist notation, being:

C3S: alite (3CaO·SiO2);
C2S: belite (2CaO·SiO2);
C3A: tricalcium aluminate (3CaO·Al2O3) (historically, and still occasionally, called celite);
C4AF: brownmillerite (4CaO·Al2O3·Fe2O3).

The silicates are responsible for the cement's mechanical properties — the tricalcium aluminate and brownmillerite are essential for the formation of the liquid phase during the sintering (firing) process of clinker at high temperature in the kiln. The chemistry of these reactions is not completely clear and is still the object of research.[8]

First, the limestone (calcium carbonate) is burned to remove its carbon, producing lime (calcium oxide) in what is known as a calcination reaction. This single chemical reaction is a major emitter of global carbon dioxide emissions.[9]

The lime reacts with silicon dioxide to produce dicalcium silicate and tricalcium silicate.

The lime also reacts with aluminium oxide to form tricalcium aluminate.

In the last step, calcium oxide, aluminium oxide, and ferric oxide react together to form brownmillerite.

Non-hydraulic cement

[edit]
Calcium oxide obtained by thermal decomposition of calcium carbonate at high temperature (above 825 °C).

A less common form of cement is non-hydraulic cement, such as slaked lime (calcium oxide mixed with water), which hardens by carbonation in contact with carbon dioxide, which is present in the air (~ 412 vol. ppm ≃ 0.04 vol. %). First calcium oxide (lime) is produced from calcium carbonate (limestone or chalk) by calcination at temperatures above 825 °C (1,517 °F) for about 10 hours at atmospheric pressure:

The calcium oxide is then spent (slaked) by mixing it with water to make slaked lime (calcium hydroxide):

Once the excess water is completely evaporated (this process is technically called setting), the carbonation starts:

This reaction is slow, because the partial pressure of carbon dioxide in the air is low (~ 0.4 millibar). The carbonation reaction requires that the dry cement be exposed to air, so the slaked lime is a non-hydraulic cement and cannot be used under water. This process is called the lime cycle.

History

[edit]

Perhaps the earliest known occurrence of cement is from twelve million years ago. A deposit of cement was formed after an occurrence of oil shale located adjacent to a bed of limestone burned by natural causes. These ancient deposits were investigated in the 1960s and 1970s.[10]

Alternatives to cement used in antiquity

[edit]

Cement, chemically speaking, is a product that includes lime as the primary binding ingredient, but is far from the first material used for cementation. The Babylonians and Assyrians used bitumen (asphalt or pitch) to bind together burnt brick or alabaster slabs. In Ancient Egypt, stone blocks were cemented together with a mortar made of sand and roughly burnt gypsum (CaSO4 · 2H2O), which is plaster of Paris, which often contained calcium carbonate (CaCO3),[11]

Ancient Greece and Rome

[edit]

Lime (calcium oxide) was used on Crete and by the Ancient Greeks. There is evidence that the Minoans of Crete used crushed potsherds as an artificial pozzolan for hydraulic cement.[11] Nobody knows who first discovered that a combination of hydrated non-hydraulic lime and a pozzolan produces a hydraulic mixture (see also: Pozzolanic reaction), but such concrete was used by the Greeks, specifically the Ancient Macedonians,[12][13] and three centuries later on a large scale by Roman engineers.[14][15][16]

There is... a kind of powder which from natural causes produces astonishing results. It is found in the neighborhood of Baiae and in the country belonging to the towns round about Mount Vesuvius. This substance when mixed with lime and rubble not only lends strength to buildings of other kinds but even when piers of it are constructed in the sea, they set hard underwater.

— Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, Liber II, De Architectura, Chapter VI "Pozzolana" Sec. 1

The Greeks used volcanic tuff from the island of Thera as their pozzolan and the Romans used crushed volcanic ash (activated aluminium silicates) with lime. This mixture could set under water, increasing its resistance to corrosion like rust.[17] The material was called pozzolana from the town of Pozzuoli, west of Naples where volcanic ash was extracted.[18] In the absence of pozzolanic ash, the Romans used powdered brick or pottery as a substitute and they may have used crushed tiles for this purpose before discovering natural sources near Rome.[11] The huge dome of the Pantheon in Rome and the massive Baths of Caracalla are examples of ancient structures made from these concretes, many of which still stand.[19][2] The vast system of Roman aqueducts also made extensive use of hydraulic cement.[20] Roman concrete was rarely used on the outside of buildings. The normal technique was to use brick facing material as the formwork for an infill of mortar mixed with an aggregate of broken pieces of stone, brick, potsherds, recycled chunks of concrete, or other building rubble.[21]

Mesoamerica

[edit]

Lightweight concrete was designed and used for the construction of structural elements by the pre-Columbian builders who lived in a very advanced civilisation in El Tajin near Mexico City, in Mexico. A detailed study of the composition of the aggregate and binder show that the aggregate was pumice and the binder was a pozzolanic cement made with volcanic ash and lime.[22]

Middle Ages

[edit]

Any preservation of this knowledge in literature from the Middle Ages is unknown, but medieval masons and some military engineers actively used hydraulic cement in structures such as canals, fortresses, harbors, and shipbuilding facilities.[23][24] A mixture of lime mortar and aggregate with brick or stone facing material was used in the Eastern Roman Empire as well as in the West into the Gothic period. The German Rhineland continued to use hydraulic mortar throughout the Middle Ages, having local pozzolana deposits called trass.[21]

16th century

[edit]

Tabby is a building material made from oyster shell lime, sand, and whole oyster shells to form a concrete. The Spanish introduced it to the Americas in the sixteenth century.[25]

18th century

[edit]

The technical knowledge for making hydraulic cement was formalized by French and British engineers in the 18th century.[23]

John Smeaton made an important contribution to the development of cements while planning the construction of the third Eddystone Lighthouse (1755–59) in the English Channel now known as Smeaton's Tower. He needed a hydraulic mortar that would set and develop some strength in the twelve-hour period between successive high tides. He performed experiments with combinations of different limestones and additives including trass and pozzolanas[11] and did exhaustive market research on the available hydraulic limes, visiting their production sites, and noted that the "hydraulicity" of the lime was directly related to the clay content of the limestone used to make it. Smeaton was a civil engineer by profession, and took the idea no further.

In the South Atlantic seaboard of the United States, tabby relying on the oyster-shell middens of earlier Native American populations was used in house construction from the 1730s to the 1860s.[25]

In Britain particularly, good quality building stone became ever more expensive during a period of rapid growth, and it became a common practice to construct prestige buildings from the new industrial bricks, and to finish them with a stucco to imitate stone. Hydraulic limes were favored for this, but the need for a fast set time encouraged the development of new cements. Most famous was Parker's "Roman cement".[26] This was developed by James Parker in the 1780s, and finally patented in 1796. It was, in fact, nothing like material used by the Romans, but was a "natural cement" made by burning septaria – nodules that are found in certain clay deposits, and that contain both clay minerals and calcium carbonate. The burnt nodules were ground to a fine powder. This product, made into a mortar with sand, set in 5–15 minutes. The success of "Roman cement" led other manufacturers to develop rival products by burning artificial hydraulic lime cements of clay and chalk. Roman cement quickly became popular but was largely replaced by Portland cement in the 1850s.[11]

19th century

[edit]

Apparently unaware of Smeaton's work, the same principle was identified by Frenchman Louis Vicat in the first decade of the nineteenth century. Vicat went on to devise a method of combining chalk and clay into an intimate mixture, and, burning this, produced an "artificial cement" in 1817[27] considered the "principal forerunner"[11] of Portland cement and "...Edgar Dobbs of Southwark patented a cement of this kind in 1811."[11]

In Russia, Egor Cheliev created a new binder by mixing lime and clay. His results were published in 1822 in his book A Treatise on the Art to Prepare a Good Mortar published in St. Petersburg. A few years later in 1825, he published another book, which described various methods of making cement and concrete, and the benefits of cement in the construction of buildings and embankments.[28][29]

William Aspdin is considered the inventor of "modern" Portland cement.[30]

Portland cement, the most common type of cement in general use around the world as a basic ingredient of concrete, mortar, stucco, and non-speciality grout, was developed in England in the mid 19th century, and usually originates from limestone. James Frost produced what he called "British cement" in a similar manner around the same time, but did not obtain a patent until 1822.[31] In 1824, Joseph Aspdin patented a similar material, which he called Portland cement, because the render made from it was in color similar to the prestigious Portland stone quarried on the Isle of Portland, Dorset, England. However, Aspdins' cement was nothing like modern Portland cement but was a first step in its development, called a proto-Portland cement.[11] Joseph Aspdins' son William Aspdin had left his father's company and in his cement manufacturing apparently accidentally produced calcium silicates in the 1840s, a middle step in the development of Portland cement. William Aspdin's innovation was counterintuitive for manufacturers of "artificial cements", because they required more lime in the mix (a problem for his father), a much higher kiln temperature (and therefore more fuel), and the resulting clinker was very hard and rapidly wore down the millstones, which were the only available grinding technology of the time. Manufacturing costs were therefore considerably higher, but the product set reasonably slowly and developed strength quickly, thus opening up a market for use in concrete. The use of concrete in construction grew rapidly from 1850 onward, and was soon the dominant use for cements. Thus Portland cement began its predominant role. Isaac Charles Johnson further refined the production of meso-Portland cement (middle stage of development) and claimed he was the real father of Portland cement.[32]

Setting time and "early strength" are important characteristics of cements. Hydraulic limes, "natural" cements, and "artificial" cements all rely on their belite (2 CaO · SiO2, abbreviated as C2S) content for strength development. Belite develops strength slowly. Because they were burned at temperatures below 1,250 °C (2,280 °F), they contained no alite (3 CaO · SiO2, abbreviated as C3S), which is responsible for early strength in modern cements. The first cement to consistently contain alite was made by William Aspdin in the early 1840s: This was what we call today "modern" Portland cement. Because of the air of mystery with which William Aspdin surrounded his product, others (e.g., Vicat and Johnson) have claimed precedence in this invention, but recent analysis[33] of both his concrete and raw cement have shown that William Aspdin's product made at Northfleet, Kent was a true alite-based cement. However, Aspdin's methods were "rule-of-thumb": Vicat is responsible for establishing the chemical basis of these cements, and Johnson established the importance of sintering the mix in the kiln.

In the US the first large-scale use of cement was Rosendale cement, a natural cement mined from a massive deposit of dolomite discovered in the early 19th century near Rosendale, New York. Rosendale cement was extremely popular for the foundation of buildings (e.g., Statue of Liberty, Capitol Building, Brooklyn Bridge) and lining water pipes.[34] Sorel cement, or magnesia-based cement, was patented in 1867 by the Frenchman Stanislas Sorel.[35] It was stronger than Portland cement but its poor water resistance (leaching) and corrosive properties (pitting corrosion due to the presence of leachable chloride anions and the low pH (8.5–9.5) of its pore water) limited its use as reinforced concrete for building construction.[36]

The next development in the manufacture of Portland cement was the introduction of the rotary kiln. It produced a clinker mixture that was both stronger, because more alite (C3S) is formed at the higher temperature it achieved (1450 °C), and more homogeneous. Because raw material is constantly fed into a rotary kiln, it allowed a continuous manufacturing process to replace lower capacity batch production processes.[11]

20th century

[edit]
The National Cement Share Company of Ethiopia's new plant in Dire Dawa

Calcium aluminate cements were patented in 1908 in France by Jules Bied for better resistance to sulfates.[37] Also in 1908, Thomas Edison experimented with pre-cast concrete in houses in Union, N.J.[38]

In the US, after World War One, the long curing time of at least a month for Rosendale cement made it unpopular for constructing highways and bridges, and many states and construction firms turned to Portland cement. Because of the switch to Portland cement, by the end of the 1920s only one of the 15 Rosendale cement companies had survived. But in the early 1930s, builders discovered that, while Portland cement set faster, it was not as durable, especially for highways—to the point that some states stopped building highways and roads with cement. Bertrain H. Wait, an engineer whose company had helped construct the New York City's Catskill Aqueduct, was impressed with the durability of Rosendale cement, and came up with a blend of both Rosendale and Portland cements that had the good attributes of both. It was highly durable and had a much faster setting time. Wait convinced the New York Commissioner of Highways to construct an experimental section of highway near New Paltz, New York, using one sack of Rosendale to six sacks of Portland cement. It was a success, and for decades the Rosendale-Portland cement blend was used in concrete highway and concrete bridge construction.[34]

Cementitious materials have been used as a nuclear waste immobilizing matrix for more than a half-century.[39] Technologies of waste cementation have been developed and deployed at industrial scale in many countries. Cementitious wasteforms require a careful selection and design process adapted to each specific type of waste to satisfy the strict waste acceptance criteria for long-term storage and disposal.[40]

Types

[edit]
Components of cement:
comparison of chemical and physical characteristics[a][41][42][43]
Property Portland
cement
Siliceous[b]
fly ash
Calcareous[c]
fly ash
Slag
cement
Silica
fume
Proportion by mass (%)
SiO2 21.9 52 35 35 85–97
Al2O3 6.9 23 18 12
Fe2O3 3 11 6 1
CaO 63 5 21 40 < 1
MgO 2.5
SO3 1.7
Specific surface (m2/kg)[d] 370 420 420 400 15,000
– 30,000
Specific gravity 3.15 2.38 2.65 2.94 2.22
General purpose Primary binder Cement replacement Cement replacement Cement replacement Property enhancer
  1. ^ Values shown are approximate: those of a specific material may vary.
  2. ^ ASTM C618 Class F
  3. ^ ASTM C618 Class C
  4. ^ Specific surface measurements for silica fume by nitrogen adsorption (BET) method, others by air permeability method (Blaine).

Modern development of hydraulic cement began with the start of the Industrial Revolution (around 1800), driven by three main needs:

  • Hydraulic cement render (stucco) for finishing brick buildings in wet climates
  • Hydraulic mortars for masonry construction of harbor works, etc., in contact with sea water
  • Development of strong concretes

Modern cements are often Portland cement or Portland cement blends, but other cement blends are used in some industrial settings.

Portland cement

[edit]

Portland cement, a form of hydraulic cement, is by far the most common type of cement in general use around the world. This cement is made by heating limestone (calcium carbonate) with other materials (such as clay) to 1,450 °C (2,640 °F) in a kiln, in a process known as calcination that liberates a molecule of carbon dioxide from the calcium carbonate to form calcium oxide, or quicklime, which then chemically combines with the other materials in the mix to form calcium silicates and other cementitious compounds. The resulting hard substance, called 'clinker', is then ground with a small amount of gypsum ( CaSO4·2H2O) into a powder to make ordinary Portland cement, the most commonly used type of cement (often referred to as OPC). Portland cement is a basic ingredient of concrete, mortar, and most non-specialty grout. The most common use for Portland cement is to make concrete. Portland cement may be grey or white.

Portland cement blend

[edit]

Portland cement blends are often available as inter-ground mixtures from cement producers, but similar formulations are often also mixed from the ground components at the concrete mixing plant.

Portland blast-furnace slag cement, or blast furnace cement (ASTM C595 and EN 197-1 nomenclature respectively), contains up to 95% ground granulated blast furnace slag, with the rest Portland clinker and a little gypsum. All compositions produce high ultimate strength, but as slag content is increased, early strength is reduced, while sulfate resistance increases and heat evolution diminishes. Used as an economic alternative to Portland sulfate-resisting and low-heat cements.

Portland-fly ash cement contains up to 40% fly ash under ASTM standards (ASTM C595), or 35% under EN standards (EN 197–1). The fly ash is pozzolanic, so that ultimate strength is maintained. Because fly ash addition allows a lower concrete water content, early strength can also be maintained. Where good quality cheap fly ash is available, this can be an economic alternative to ordinary Portland cement.[44]

Portland pozzolan cement includes fly ash cement, since fly ash is a pozzolan, but also includes cements made from other natural or artificial pozzolans. In countries where volcanic ashes are available (e.g., Italy, Chile, Mexico, the Philippines), these cements are often the most common form in use. The maximum replacement ratios are generally defined as for Portland-fly ash cement.

Portland silica fume cement. Addition of silica fume can yield exceptionally high strengths, and cements containing 5–20% silica fume are occasionally produced, with 10% being the maximum allowed addition under EN 197–1. However, silica fume is more usually added to Portland cement at the concrete mixer.[45]

Masonry cements are used for preparing bricklaying mortars and stuccos, and must not be used in concrete. They are usually complex proprietary formulations containing Portland clinker and a number of other ingredients that may include limestone, hydrated lime, air entrainers, retarders, waterproofers, and coloring agents. They are formulated to yield workable mortars that allow rapid and consistent masonry work. Subtle variations of masonry cement in North America are plastic cements and stucco cements. These are designed to produce a controlled bond with masonry blocks.

Expansive cements contain, in addition to Portland clinker, expansive clinkers (usually sulfoaluminate clinkers), and are designed to offset the effects of drying shrinkage normally encountered in hydraulic cements. This cement can make concrete for floor slabs (up to 60 m square) without contraction joints.

White blended cements may be made using white clinker (containing little or no iron) and white supplementary materials such as high-purity metakaolin. Colored cements serve decorative purposes. Some standards allow the addition of pigments to produce colored Portland cement. Other standards (e.g., ASTM) do not allow pigments in Portland cement, and colored cements are sold as blended hydraulic cements.

Very finely ground cements are cement mixed with sand or with slag or other pozzolan type minerals that are extremely finely ground together. Such cements can have the same physical characteristics as normal cement but with 50% less cement, particularly because there is more surface area for the chemical reaction. Even with intensive grinding they can use up to 50% less energy (and thus less carbon emissions) to fabricate than ordinary Portland cements.[46]

Other

[edit]

Pozzolan-lime cements are mixtures of ground pozzolan and lime. These are the cements the Romans used, and are present in surviving Roman structures like the Pantheon in Rome. They develop strength slowly, but their ultimate strength can be very high. The hydration products that produce strength are essentially the same as those in Portland cement.

Slag-lime cements—ground granulated blast-furnace slag—are not hydraulic on their own, but are "activated" by addition of alkalis, most economically using lime. They are similar to pozzolan lime cements in their properties. Only granulated slag (i.e., water-quenched, glassy slag) is effective as a cement component.

Supersulfated cements contain about 80% ground granulated blast furnace slag, 15% gypsum or anhydrite and a little Portland clinker or lime as an activator. They produce strength by formation of ettringite, with strength growth similar to a slow Portland cement. They exhibit good resistance to aggressive agents, including sulfate.

Calcium aluminate cements are hydraulic cements made primarily from limestone and bauxite. The active ingredients are monocalcium aluminate CaAl2O4 (CaO · Al2O3 or CA in cement chemist notation, CCN) and mayenite Ca12Al14O33 (12 CaO · 7 Al2O3, or C12A7 in CCN). Strength forms by hydration to calcium aluminate hydrates. They are well-adapted for use in refractory (high-temperature resistant) concretes, e.g., for furnace linings.

Calcium sulfoaluminate cements are made from clinkers that include ye'elimite (Ca4(AlO2)6SO4 or C4A3S in Cement chemist's notation) as a primary phase. They are used in expansive cements, in ultra-high early strength cements, and in "low-energy" cements. Hydration produces ettringite, and specialized physical properties (such as expansion or rapid reaction) are obtained by adjustment of the availability of calcium and sulfate ions. Their use as a low-energy alternative to Portland cement has been pioneered in China, where several million tonnes per year are produced.[47][48] Energy requirements are lower because of the lower kiln temperatures required for reaction, and the lower amount of limestone (which must be endothermically decarbonated) in the mix. In addition, the lower limestone content and lower fuel consumption leads to a CO
2
emission around half that associated with Portland clinker. However, SO2 emissions are usually significantly higher.

"Natural" cements corresponding to certain cements of the pre-Portland era, are produced by burning argillaceous limestones at moderate temperatures. The level of clay components in the limestone (around 30–35%) is such that large amounts of belite (the low-early strength, high-late strength mineral in Portland cement) are formed without the formation of excessive amounts of free lime. As with any natural material, such cements have highly variable properties.

Geopolymer cements are made from mixtures of water-soluble alkali metal silicates, and aluminosilicate mineral powders such as fly ash and metakaolin.

Polymer cements are made from organic chemicals that polymerise. Producers often use thermoset materials. While they are often significantly more expensive, they can give a water proof material that has useful tensile strength.

Sorel cement is a hard, durable cement made by combining magnesium oxide and a magnesium chloride solution

Fiber mesh cement or fiber reinforced concrete is cement that is made up of fibrous materials like synthetic fibers, glass fibers, natural fibers, and steel fibers. This type of mesh is distributed evenly throughout the wet concrete. The purpose of fiber mesh is to reduce water loss from the concrete as well as enhance its structural integrity.[49] When used in plasters, fiber mesh increases cohesiveness, tensile strength, impact resistance, and to reduce shrinkage; ultimately, the main purpose of these combined properties is to reduce cracking.[50]

Electric cement is proposed to be made by recycling cement from demolition wastes in an electric arc furnace as part of a steelmaking process. The recycled cement is intended to be used to replace part or all of the lime used in steelmaking, resulting in a slag-like material that is similar in mineralogy to Portland cement, eliminating most of the associated carbon emissions.[51]

Setting, hardening and curing

[edit]

Cement starts to set when mixed with water, which causes a series of hydration chemical reactions. The constituents slowly hydrate and the mineral hydrates solidify and harden. The interlocking of the hydrates gives cement its strength. Contrary to popular belief, hydraulic cement does not set by drying out — proper curing requires maintaining the appropriate moisture content necessary for the hydration reactions during the setting and the hardening processes. If hydraulic cements dry out during the curing phase, the resulting product can be insufficiently hydrated and significantly weakened. A minimum temperature of 5 °C is recommended, and no more than 30 °C.[52] The concrete at young age must be protected against water evaporation due to direct insolation, elevated temperature, low relative humidity and wind.

The interfacial transition zone (ITZ) is a region of the cement paste around the aggregate particles in concrete. In the zone, a gradual transition in the microstructural features occurs.[53] This zone can be up to 35 micrometer wide.[54]: 351  Other studies have shown that the width can be up to 50 micrometer. The average content of unreacted clinker phase decreases and porosity decreases towards the aggregate surface. Similarly, the content of ettringite increases in ITZ. [54]: 352 

Safety issues

[edit]

Bags of cement routinely have health and safety warnings printed on them because not only is cement highly alkaline, but the setting process is exothermic. As a result, wet cement is strongly caustic (pH = 13.5) and can easily cause severe skin burns if not promptly washed off with water. Similarly, dry cement powder in contact with mucous membranes can cause severe eye or respiratory irritation. Some trace elements, such as chromium, from impurities naturally present in the raw materials used to produce cement may cause allergic dermatitis.[55] Reducing agents such as ferrous sulfate (FeSO4) are often added to cement to convert the carcinogenic hexavalent chromate (CrO42−) into trivalent chromium (Cr3+), a less toxic chemical species. Cement users need also to wear appropriate gloves and protective clothing.[56]

Cement industry in the world

[edit]
Global cement production (2022)
Global cement production in 2022
Global cement capacity (2022)
Global cement capacity in 2022

In 2010, the world production of hydraulic cement was 3,300 megatonnes (3,600×10^6 short tons). The top three producers were China with 1,800, India with 220, and the United States with 63.5 million tonnes for a total of over half the world total by the world's three most populated states.[57]

For the world capacity to produce cement in 2010, the situation was similar with the top three states (China, India, and the US) accounting for just under half the world total capacity.[58]

Over 2011 and 2012, global consumption continued to climb, rising to 3585 Mt in 2011 and 3736 Mt in 2012, while annual growth rates eased to 8.3% and 4.2%, respectively.

China, representing an increasing share of world cement consumption, remains the main engine of global growth. By 2012, Chinese demand was recorded at 2160 Mt, representing 58% of world consumption. Annual growth rates, which reached 16% in 2010, appear to have softened, slowing to 5–6% over 2011 and 2012, as China's economy targets a more sustainable growth rate.

Outside of China, worldwide consumption climbed by 4.4% to 1462 Mt in 2010, 5% to 1535 Mt in 2011, and finally 2.7% to 1576 Mt in 2012.

Iran is now the 3rd largest cement producer in the world and has increased its output by over 10% from 2008 to 2011.[59] Because of climbing energy costs in Pakistan and other major cement-producing countries, Iran is in a unique position as a trading partner, utilizing its own surplus petroleum to power clinker plants. Now a top producer in the Middle-East, Iran is further increasing its dominant position in local markets and abroad.[60]

The performance in North America and Europe over the 2010–12 period contrasted strikingly with that of China, as the global financial crisis evolved into a sovereign debt crisis for many economies in this region[clarification needed] and recession. Cement consumption levels for this region fell by 1.9% in 2010 to 445 Mt, recovered by 4.9% in 2011, then dipped again by 1.1% in 2012.

The performance in the rest of the world, which includes many emerging economies in Asia, Africa and Latin America and representing some 1020 Mt cement demand in 2010, was positive and more than offset the declines in North America and Europe. Annual consumption growth was recorded at 7.4% in 2010, moderating to 5.1% and 4.3% in 2011 and 2012, respectively.

As at year-end 2012, the global cement industry consisted of 5673 cement production facilities, including both integrated and grinding, of which 3900 were located in China and 1773 in the rest of the world.

Total cement capacity worldwide was recorded at 5245 Mt in 2012, with 2950 Mt located in China and 2295 Mt in the rest of the world.[6]

China

[edit]

"For the past 18 years, China consistently has produced more cement than any other country in the world. [...] (However,) China's cement export peaked in 1994 with 11 million tonnes shipped out and has been in steady decline ever since. Only 5.18 million tonnes were exported out of China in 2002. Offered at $34 a ton, Chinese cement is pricing itself out of the market as Thailand is asking as little as $20 for the same quality."[61]

In 2006, it was estimated that China manufactured 1.235 billion tonnes of cement, which was 44% of the world total cement production.[62] "Demand for cement in China is expected to advance 5.4% annually and exceed 1 billion tonnes in 2008, driven by slowing but healthy growth in construction expenditures. Cement consumed in China will amount to 44% of global demand, and China will remain the world's largest national consumer of cement by a large margin."[63]

In 2010, 3.3 billion tonnes of cement was consumed globally. Of this, China accounted for 1.8 billion tonnes.[64]

Environmental impacts

[edit]

Cement manufacture causes environmental impacts at all stages of the process. These include emissions of airborne pollution in the form of dust, gases, noise and vibration when operating machinery and during blasting in quarries, and damage to countryside from quarrying. Equipment to reduce dust emissions during quarrying and manufacture of cement is widely used, and equipment to trap and separate exhaust gases are coming into increased use. Environmental protection also includes the re-integration of quarries into the countryside after they have been closed down by returning them to nature or re-cultivating them.

CO
2
emissions

[edit]
Global carbon emission by type to 2018
Global carbon emission by type to 2018

Carbon concentration in cement spans from ≈5% in cement structures to ≈8% in the case of roads in cement.[65] Cement manufacturing releases CO2 in the atmosphere both directly when calcium carbonate is heated, producing lime and carbon dioxide,[66][67] and also indirectly through the use of energy if its production involves the emission of CO
2
. The cement industry produces about 10% of global human-made CO
2
emissions, of which 60% is from the chemical process, and 40% from burning fuel.[68] A Chatham House study from 2018 estimates that the 4 billion tonnes of cement produced annually account for 8% of worldwide CO
2
emissions.[5]

Nearly 900 kg of CO
2
are emitted for every 1000 kg of Portland cement produced. In the European Union, the specific energy consumption for the production of cement clinker has been reduced by approximately 30% since the 1970s. This reduction in primary energy requirements is equivalent to approximately 11 million tonnes of coal per year with corresponding benefits in reduction of CO
2
emissions. This accounts for approximately 5% of anthropogenic CO
2
.[69]

The majority of carbon dioxide emissions in the manufacture of Portland cement (approximately 60%) are produced from the chemical decomposition of limestone to lime, an ingredient in Portland cement clinker. These emissions may be reduced by lowering the clinker content of cement. They can also be reduced by alternative fabrication methods such as the intergrinding cement with sand or with slag or other pozzolan type minerals to a very fine powder.[70]

To reduce the transport of heavier raw materials and to minimize the associated costs, it is more economical to build cement plants closer to the limestone quarries rather than to the consumer centers.[71]

As of 2019 carbon capture and storage is about to be trialed, but its financial viability is uncertain.[72]

CO
2
absorption

[edit]

Hydrated products of Portland cement, such as concrete and mortars, slowly reabsorb atmospheric CO2 gas, which has been released during calcination in a kiln. This natural process, reversed to calcination, is called carbonation.[73] As it depends on CO2 diffusion into the bulk of concrete, its rate depends on many parameters, such as environmental conditions and surface area exposed to the atmosphere.[74][75] Carbonation is particularly significant at the latter stages of the concrete life - after demolition and crushing of the debris. It was estimated that during the whole life-cycle of cement products, it can be reabsorbed nearly 30% of atmospheric CO2 generated by cement production.[75]

Carbonation process is considered as a mechanism of concrete degradation. It reduces pH of concrete that promotes reinforcement steel corrosion.[73] However, as the product of Ca(OH)2 carbonation, CaCO3, occupies a greater volume, porosity of concrete reduces. This increases strength and hardness of concrete.[76]

There are proposals to reduce carbon footprint of hydraulic cement by adopting non-hydraulic cement, lime mortar, for certain applications. It reabsorbs some of the CO
2
during hardening, and has a lower energy requirement in production than Portland cement.[77]

A few other attempts to increase absorption of carbon dioxide include cements based on magnesium (Sorel cement).[78][79][80]

Heavy metal emissions in the air

[edit]

In some circumstances, mainly depending on the origin and the composition of the raw materials used, the high-temperature calcination process of limestone and clay minerals can release in the atmosphere gases and dust rich in volatile heavy metals, e.g. thallium,[81] cadmium and mercury are the most toxic. Heavy metals (Tl, Cd, Hg, ...) and also selenium are often found as trace elements in common metal sulfides (pyrite (FeS2), zinc blende (ZnS), galena (PbS), ...) present as secondary minerals in most of the raw materials. Environmental regulations exist in many countries to limit these emissions. As of 2011 in the United States, cement kilns are "legally allowed to pump more toxins into the air than are hazardous-waste incinerators."[82]

Heavy metals present in the clinker

[edit]

The presence of heavy metals in the clinker arises both from the natural raw materials and from the use of recycled by-products or alternative fuels. The high pH prevailing in the cement porewater (12.5 < pH < 13.5) limits the mobility of many heavy metals by decreasing their solubility and increasing their sorption onto the cement mineral phases. Nickel, zinc and lead are commonly found in cement in non-negligible concentrations. Chromium may also directly arise as natural impurity from the raw materials or as secondary contamination from the abrasion of hard chromium steel alloys used in the ball mills when the clinker is ground. As chromate (CrO42−) is toxic and may cause severe skin allergies at trace concentration, it is sometimes reduced into trivalent Cr(III) by addition of ferrous sulfate (FeSO4).

Use of alternative fuels and by-products materials

[edit]

A cement plant consumes 3 to 6 GJ of fuel per tonne of clinker produced, depending on the raw materials and the process used. Most cement kilns today use coal and petroleum coke as primary fuels, and to a lesser extent natural gas and fuel oil. Selected waste and by-products with recoverable calorific value can be used as fuels in a cement kiln (referred to as co-processing), replacing a portion of conventional fossil fuels, like coal, if they meet strict specifications. Selected waste and by-products containing useful minerals such as calcium, silica, alumina, and iron can be used as raw materials in the kiln, replacing raw materials such as clay, shale, and limestone. Because some materials have both useful mineral content and recoverable calorific value, the distinction between alternative fuels and raw materials is not always clear. For example, sewage sludge has a low but significant calorific value, and burns to give ash containing minerals useful in the clinker matrix.[83] Scrap automobile and truck tires are useful in cement manufacturing as they have high calorific value and the iron embedded in tires is useful as a feed stock.[84]: p. 27 

Clinker is manufactured by heating raw materials inside the main burner of a kiln to a temperature of 1,450 °C. The flame reaches temperatures of 1,800 °C. The material remains at 1,200 °C for 12–15 seconds at 1,800 °C or sometimes for 5–8 seconds (also referred to as residence time). These characteristics of a clinker kiln offer numerous benefits and they ensure a complete destruction of organic compounds, a total neutralization of acid gases, sulphur oxides and hydrogen chloride. Furthermore, heavy metal traces are embedded in the clinker structure and no by-products, such as ash or residues, are produced.[85]

The EU cement industry already uses more than 40% fuels derived from waste and biomass in supplying the thermal energy to the grey clinker making process. Although the choice for this so-called alternative fuels (AF) is typically cost driven, other factors are becoming more important. Use of alternative fuels provides benefits for both society and the company: CO
2
-emissions are lower than with fossil fuels, waste can be co-processed in an efficient and sustainable manner and the demand for certain virgin materials can be reduced. Yet there are large differences in the share of alternative fuels used between the European Union (EU) member states. The societal benefits could be improved if more member states increase their alternative fuels share. The Ecofys study[86] assessed the barriers and opportunities for further uptake of alternative fuels in 14 EU member states. The Ecofys study found that local factors constrain the market potential to a much larger extent than the technical and economic feasibility of the cement industry itself.

Reduced-footprint cement

[edit]

Growing environmental concerns and the increasing cost of fossil fuels have resulted, in many countries, in a sharp reduction of the resources needed to produce cement, as well as effluents (dust and exhaust gases).[87] Reduced-footprint cement is a cementitious material that meets or exceeds the functional performance capabilities of Portland cement. Various techniques are under development. One is geopolymer cement, which incorporates recycled materials, thereby reducing consumption of raw materials, water, and energy. Another approach is to reduce or eliminate the production and release of damaging pollutants and greenhouse gasses, particularly CO
2
.[88] Recycling old cement in electric arc furnaces is another approach.[89] Also, a team at the University of Edinburgh has developed the 'DUPE' process based on the microbial activity of Sporosarcina pasteurii, a bacterium precipitating calcium carbonate, which, when mixed with sand and urine, can produce mortar blocks with a compressive strength 70% of that of concrete.[90] An overview of climate-friendly methods for cement production can be found here.[91]

See also

[edit]
  • Asphalt concrete
  • Calcium aluminate cements
  • Cement chemist notation
  • Cement render
  • Cenocell
  • Energetically modified cement (EMC)
  • Fly ash
  • Geopolymer cement
  • Portland cement
  • Rosendale cement
  • Sulfate attack in concrete and mortar
  • Sulfur concrete
  • Tiocem
  • List of countries by cement production

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Draeger: Guide for selection and use of filtering devices" (PDF). Draeger. 22 May 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 May 2020. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
  2. ^ a b Rodgers, Lucy (17 December 2018). "The massive CO
    2
    emitter you may not know about". BBC News. Retrieved 17 December 2018.
  3. ^ Cement Analyst, Milan A (2015), Lancaster, Lynne C. (ed.), "Opus Caementicium", Innovative Vaulting in the Architecture of the Roman Empire: 1st to 4th Centuries CE, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–38, ISBN 978-1-107-05935-1, retrieved 7 March 2025
  4. ^ a b "Cement" (PDF). United States Geological Survey (USGS). Retrieved 26 September 2023.
  5. ^ a b c "Making Concrete Change: Innovation in Low-carbon Cement and Concrete". Chatham House. 13 June 2018. Archived from the original on 19 December 2018. Retrieved 17 December 2018.
  6. ^ a b Hargreaves, David (March 2013). "The Global Cement Report 10th Edition" (PDF). International Cement Review. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 November 2013.
  7. ^ Cao, Zhi; Myers, Rupert J.; Lupton, Richard C.; Duan, Huabo; Sacchi, Romain; Zhou, Nan; Reed Miller, T.; Cullen, Jonathan M.; Ge, Quansheng; Liu, Gang (29 July 2020). "The sponge effect and carbon emission mitigation potentials of the global cement cycle". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3777. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3777C. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17583-w. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7392754. PMID 32728073.
  8. ^ "Cement's basic molecular structure finally decoded (MIT, 2009)". Archived from the original on 21 February 2013.
  9. ^ "EPA Overview of Greenhouse Gases". 23 December 2015.
  10. ^ "The History of Concrete". Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Archived from the original on 27 November 2012. Retrieved 8 January 2013.
  11. ^ a b c d e f g h i Blezard, Robert G. (12 November 2003). "The History of Calcareous Cements". In Hewlett, Peter (ed.). Lea's Chemistry of Cement and Concrete. Elsevier. pp. 1–24. ISBN 978-0-08-053541-8.
  12. ^ Brabant, Malcolm (12 April 2011). Macedonians created cement three centuries before the Romans Archived 9 April 2019 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News.
  13. ^ "Heracles to Alexander The Great: Treasures From The Royal Capital of Macedon, A Hellenic Kingdom in the Age of Democracy". Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford. Archived from the original on 17 January 2012.
  14. ^ Hill, Donald (19 November 2013). A History of Engineering in Classical and Medieval Times. Routledge. p. 106. ISBN 978-1-317-76157-0.
  15. ^ "History of cement". www.understanding-cement.com. Retrieved 17 December 2018.
  16. ^ Trendacosta, Katharine (18 December 2014). "How the Ancient Romans Made Better Concrete Than We Do Now". Gizmodo.
  17. ^ "How Natural Pozzolans Improve Concrete". Natural Pozzolan Association. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  18. ^ Ridi, Francesca (April 2010). "Hydration of Cement: still a lot to be understood" (PDF). La Chimica & l'Industria (3): 110–117. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 November 2015.
  19. ^ "Pure natural pozzolan cement" (PDF). Archived from the original on 18 October 2006. Retrieved 12 January 2009.cite web: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link). chamorro.com
  20. ^ Russo, Ralph (2006) "Aqueduct Architecture: Moving Water to the Masses in Ancient Rome" Archived 12 October 2008 at the Wayback Machine, in Math in the Beauty and Realization of Architecture, Vol. IV, Curriculum Units by Fellows of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute 1978–2012, Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute.
  21. ^ a b Cowan, Henry J. (1975). "An Historical Note on Concrete". Architectural Science Review. 18: 10–13. doi:10.1080/00038628.1975.9696342.
  22. ^ Cabrera, J. G.; Rivera-Villarreal, R.; Sri Ravindrarajah, R. (1997). "Properties and Durability of a Pre-Columbian Lightweight Concrete". SP-170: Fourth CANMET/ACI International Conference on Durability of Concrete. Vol. 170. pp. 1215–1230. doi:10.14359/6874. ISBN 9780870316692. S2CID 138768044. cite book: |journal= ignored (help)
  23. ^ a b Sismondo, Sergio (20 November 2009). An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-4443-1512-7.
  24. ^ Mukerji, Chandra (2009). Impossible Engineering: Technology and Territoriality on the Canal Du Midi. Princeton University Press. p. 121. ISBN 978-0-691-14032-2.
  25. ^ a b <Taves, Loren Sickels (27 October 2015). "Tabby Houses of the South Atlantic Seaboard". Old-House Journal. Active Interest Media, Inc.: 5.
  26. ^ Francis, A.J. (1977) The Cement Industry 1796–1914: A History, David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-7386-2, Ch. 2.
  27. ^ "Who Discovered Cement". 12 September 2012. Archived from the original on 4 February 2013.
  28. ^ Znachko-Iavorskii; I. L. (1969). Egor Gerasimovich Chelidze, izobretatelʹ tsementa. Sabchota Sakartvelo. Archived from the original on 1 February 2014.
  29. ^ "Lafarge History of Cement". Archived from the original on 2 February 2014.
  30. ^ Courland, Robert (2011). Concrete planet : the strange and fascinating story of the world's most common man-made material. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. p. 190. ISBN 978-1616144814.
  31. ^ Francis, A.J. (1977) The Cement Industry 1796–1914: A History, David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-7386-2, Ch. 5.
  32. ^ Hahn, Thomas F. and Kemp, Emory Leland (1994). Cement mills along the Potomac River. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press. p. 16. ISBN 9781885907004
  33. ^ Hewlett, Peter (2003). Lea's Chemistry of Cement and Concrete. Butterworth-Heinemann. p. Ch. 1. ISBN 978-0-08-053541-8. Archived from the original on 1 November 2015.
  34. ^ a b "Natural Cement Comes Back". Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation. October 1941. p. 118.
  35. ^ Stanislas Sorel (1867). "Sur un nouveau ciment magnésien". Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l'Académie des sciences, volume 65, pages 102–104.
  36. ^ Walling, Sam A.; Provis, John L. (2016). "Magnesia-based cements: A journey of 150 years, and cements for the future?". Chemical Reviews. 116 (7): 4170–4204. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00463. ISSN 0009-2665. PMID 27002788.
  37. ^ McArthur, H.; Spalding, D. (1 January 2004). Engineering Materials Science: Properties, Uses, Degradation, Remediation. Elsevier. ISBN 9781782420491.
  38. ^ "How Cement Mixers Work". HowStuffWorks. 26 January 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2020.
  39. ^ Glasser F. (2011). Application of inorganic cements to the conditioning and immobilisation of radioactive wastes. In: Ojovan M.I. (2011). Handbook of advanced radioactive waste conditioning technologies. Woodhead, Cambridge, 512 pp.
  40. ^ Abdel Rahman R.O., Rahimov R.Z., Rahimova N.R., Ojovan M.I. (2015). Cementitious materials for nuclear waste immobilization. Wiley, Chichester 232 pp.
  41. ^ Holland, Terence C. (2005). "Silica Fume User's Manual" (PDF). Silica Fume Association and United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Technical Report FHWA-IF-05-016. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
  42. ^ Kosmatka, S.; Kerkhoff, B.; Panerese, W. (2002). Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures (14 ed.). Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois.
  43. ^ Gamble, William. "Cement, Mortar, and Concrete". In Baumeister; Avallone; Baumeister (eds.). Mark's Handbook for Mechanical Engineers (Eighth ed.). McGraw Hill. Section 6, page 177.
  44. ^ U.S. Federal Highway Administration. "Fly Ash". Archived from the original on 21 June 2007. Retrieved 24 January 2007.
  45. ^ U.S. Federal Highway Administration. "Silica Fume". Archived from the original on 22 January 2007. Retrieved 24 January 2007.
  46. ^ Justnes, Harald; Elfgren, Lennart; Ronin, Vladimir (2005). "Mechanism for performance of energetically modified cement versus corresponding blended cement" (PDF). Cement and Concrete Research. 35 (2): 315–323. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.05.022. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 July 2011.
  47. ^ Bye, G.C. (1999). Portland Cement. 2nd Ed., Thomas Telford. pp. 206–208. ISBN 0-7277-2766-4
  48. ^ Zhang, Liang; Su, Muzhen; Wang, Yanmou (1999). "Development of the use of sulfo- and ferroaluminate cements in China". Advances in Cement Research. 11: 15–21. doi:10.1680/adcr.1999.11.1.15.
  49. ^ Munsell, Faith (31 December 2019). "Concrete mesh: When to use fiber mesh or wire mesh | Port Aggregates". Port Aggregates. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
  50. ^ "Plaster / Stucco Manual" (PDF). Cement.org. 2003. p. 13. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  51. ^ Barnard, Michael (30 May 2024). "Many Green Cement Roads Lead Through Electric Arc Steel Furnaces". CleanTechnica. Retrieved 11 June 2024.
  52. ^ "Using cement based products during winter months". sovchem.co.uk. 29 May 2018. Archived from the original on 29 May 2018.
  53. ^ a b Scrivener, K.L., Crumbie, A.K., and Laugesen P. (2004). "The Interfacial Transition Zone (ITZ) between cement paste and aggregate in concrete." Interface Science, 12 (4), 411–421. doi: 10.1023/B:INTS.0000042339.92990.4c.
  54. ^ a b c H. F. W. Taylor, Cement chemistry, 2nd ed. London: T. Telford, 1997.
  55. ^ "Construction Information Sheet No 26 (revision2)" (PDF). hse.gov.uk. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 June 2011. Retrieved 15 February 2011.
  56. ^ "CIS26 – cement" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 June 2011. Retrieved 5 May 2011.
  57. ^ United States Geological Survey. "USGS Mineral Program Cement Report. (Jan 2011)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 October 2011.
  58. ^ Edwards, P; McCaffrey, R. Global Cement Directory 2010. PRo Publications Archived 3 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Epsom, UK, 2010.
  59. ^ "Pakistan loses Afghan cement market share to Iran". International Cement Revie. 20 August 2012. Archived from the original on 22 September 2013. Retrieved 2 November 2024.
  60. ^ ICR Newsroom. Pakistan loses Afghan cement market share to Iran Archived 22 September 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 19 November 2013.
  61. ^ Yan, Li Yong (7 January 2004) China's way forward paved in cement, Asia Times
  62. ^ "China now no. 1 in CO emissions; USA in second position: more info". NEAA. 19 June 2007. Archived from the original on 3 July 2007.
  63. ^ "China's cement demand to top 1 billion tonnes in 2008". CementAmericas. November 2004. Archived from the original on 27 April 2009.
  64. ^ "Uses of Coal and Cement". World Coal Association. Archived from the original on 8 August 2011.
  65. ^ Scalenghe, R.; Malucelli, F.; Ungaro, F.; Perazzone, L.; Filippi, N.; Edwards, A.C. (2011). "Influence of 150 years of land use on anthropogenic and natural carbon stocks in Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy)". Environmental Science & Technology. 45 (12): 5112–5117. Bibcode:2011EnST...45.5112S. doi:10.1021/es1039437. PMID 21609007.
  66. ^ "EIA – Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the U.S. 2006-Carbon Dioxide Emissions". US Department of Energy. Archived from the original on 23 May 2011.
  67. ^ Matar, W.; Elshurafa, A. M. (2017). "Striking a balance between profit and carbon dioxide emissions in the Saudi cement industry". International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 61: 111–123. Bibcode:2017IJGGC..61..111M. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.03.031.
  68. ^ "Trends in global CO
    2
    emissions: 2014 Report" (PDF). PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency & European Commission Joint Research Centre. 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 October 2016.
  69. ^ Mahasenan, Natesan; Smith, Steve; Humphreysm Kenneth; Kaya, Y. (2003). "The Cement Industry and Global Climate Change: Current and Potential Future Cement Industry CO
    2
    Emissions". Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies – 6th International Conference. Oxford: Pergamon. pp. 995–1000. ISBN 978-0-08-044276-1.
  70. ^ "Blended Cement". Science Direct. 2015. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  71. ^ Chandak, Shobhit. "Report on cement industry in India". scribd. Archived from the original on 22 February 2012. Retrieved 21 July 2011.
  72. ^ "World's first zero-emission cement plant takes shape in Norway". Euractiv.com Ltd. 13 December 2018.
  73. ^ a b Pade, Claus; Guimaraes, Maria (1 September 2007). "The CO2 uptake of concrete in a 100 year perspective". Cement and Concrete Research. 37 (9): 1348–1356. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.06.009. ISSN 0008-8846.
  74. ^ Xi, Fengming; Davis, Steven J.; Ciais, Philippe; Crawford-Brown, Douglas; Guan, Dabo; Pade, Claus; Shi, Tiemao; Syddall, Mark; Lv, Jie; Ji, Lanzhu; Bing, Longfei; Wang, Jiaoyue; Wei, Wei; Yang, Keun-Hyeok; Lagerblad, Björn (December 2016). "Substantial global carbon uptake by cement carbonation". Nature Geoscience. 9 (12): 880–883. Bibcode:2016NatGe...9..880X. doi:10.1038/ngeo2840. ISSN 1752-0908.
  75. ^ a b Cao, Zhi; Myers, Rupert J.; Lupton, Richard C.; Duan, Huabo; Sacchi, Romain; Zhou, Nan; Reed Miller, T.; Cullen, Jonathan M.; Ge, Quansheng; Liu, Gang (29 July 2020). "The sponge effect and carbon emission mitigation potentials of the global cement cycle". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3777. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3777C. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17583-w. hdl:10044/1/81385. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7392754. PMID 32728073.
  76. ^ Kim, Jin-Keun; Kim, Chin-Yong; Yi, Seong-Tae; Lee, Yun (1 February 2009). "Effect of carbonation on the rebound number and compressive strength of concrete". Cement and Concrete Composites. 31 (2): 139–144. doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.10.001. ISSN 0958-9465.
  77. ^ Kent, Douglas (22 October 2007). "Response: Lime is a much greener option than cement, says Douglas Kent". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 22 January 2020.
  78. ^ "Novacem's 'carbon negative cement'". The American Ceramic Society. 9 March 2011. Retrieved 26 September 2023.
  79. ^ "Novacem". imperialinnovations.co.uk. Archived from the original on 3 August 2009.
  80. ^ Jha, Alok (31 December 2008). "Revealed: The cement that eats carbon dioxide". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 6 August 2013. Retrieved 28 April 2010.
  81. ^ "Factsheet on: Thallium" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 January 2012. Retrieved 15 September 2009.
  82. ^ Berkes, Howard (10 November 2011). "EPA Regulations Give Kilns Permission To Pollute : NPR". NPR.org. Archived from the original on 17 November 2011. Retrieved 17 November 2011.
  83. ^ "Guidelines for the selection and use of fuels and raw materials in the cement manufacturing process" (PDF). World Business Council for Sustainable Development. 1 June 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 September 2008.
  84. ^ "Increasing the use of alternative fuels at cement plants: International best practice" (PDF). International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group. 2017.
  85. ^ "Cement, concrete & the circular economy" (PDF). cembureau.eu. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 November 2018.
  86. ^ de Beer, Jeroen et al. (2017) Status and prospects of co-processing of waste in EU cement plants Archived 30 December 2020 at the Wayback Machine. ECOFYS study.
  87. ^ "Alternative fuels in cement manufacture – CEMBUREAU brochure, 1997" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 October 2013.
  88. ^ "Engineers develop cement with 97 percent smaller carbon dioxide and energy footprint – DrexelNow". DrexelNow. 20 February 2012. Archived from the original on 18 December 2015. Retrieved 16 January 2016.
  89. ^ "How to make low-carbon concrete from old cement". The Economist. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 27 April 2023.
  90. ^ Monks, Kieron (22 May 2014). "Would you live in a house made of sand and bacteria? It's a surprisingly good idea". CNN. Archived from the original on 20 July 2014. Retrieved 20 July 2014.
  91. ^ "Top-Innovationen 2020: Zement lässt sich auch klimafreundlich produzieren". www.spektrum.de (in German). Retrieved 28 December 2020.

Further reading

[edit]
  • Taylor, Harry F. W. (1997). Cement Chemistry. Thomas Telford. ISBN 978-0-7277-2592-9.
  • Peter Hewlett; Martin Liska (2019). Lea's Chemistry of Cement and Concrete. Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-08-100795-2.
  • Aitcin, Pierre-Claude (2000). "Cements of yesterday and today: Concrete of tomorrow". Cement and Concrete Research. 30 (9): 1349–1359. doi:10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00365-3.
  • van Oss, Hendrik G.; Padovani, Amy C. (2002). "Cement manufacture and the environment, Part I: Chemistry and Technology". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 6 (1): 89–105. Bibcode:2002JInEc...6...89O. doi:10.1162/108819802320971650. S2CID 96660377.
  • van Oss, Hendrik G.; Padovani, Amy C. (2003). "Cement manufacture and the environment, Part II: Environmental challenges and opportunities" (PDF). Journal of Industrial Ecology. 7 (1): 93–126. Bibcode:2003JInEc...7...93O. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.469.2404. doi:10.1162/108819803766729212. S2CID 44083686. Archived from the original on 22 September 2017. Retrieved 24 October 2017.
  • Deolalkar, S. P. (2016). Designing green cement plants. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 9780128034354. OCLC 919920182.
  • Friedrich W. Locher: Cement : Principles of production and use, Düsseldorf, Germany: Verlag Bau + Technik GmbH, 2006, ISBN 3-7640-0420-7
  • Javed I. Bhatty, F. MacGregor Miller, Steven H. Kosmatka; editors: Innovations in Portland Cement Manufacturing, SP400, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, U.S., 2004, ISBN 0-89312-234-3
  • "Why cement emissions matter for climate change" Archived 21 March 2019 at the Wayback Machine Carbon Brief 2018
  • Neville, A.M. (1996). Properties of concrete. Fourth and final edition standards. Pearson, Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-582-23070-5. OCLC 33837400.
  • Taylor, H.F.W. (1990). Cement chemistry. Academic Press. p. 475. ISBN 978-0-12-683900-5.
  • Ulm, Franz-Josef; Roland J.-M. Pellenq; Akihiro Kushima; Rouzbeh Shahsavari; Krystyn J. Van Vliet; Markus J. Buehler; Sidney Yip (2009). "A realistic molecular model of cement hydrates". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (38): 16102–16107. Bibcode:2009PNAS..10616102P. doi:10.1073/pnas.0902180106. PMC 2739865. PMID 19805265.
[edit]
  • "Cement" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 5 (11th ed.). 1911.

 

Driving Directions in Cook County


Driving Directions From 42.040913746131, -88.212085693635 to
Driving Directions From 42.086153671225, -88.19640031169 to
Driving Directions From 42.07984865544, -88.090966667006 to
Driving Directions From 42.057033817479, -88.12104223269 to
Driving Directions From 42.10843482977, -88.114090738222 to
Driving Directions From 42.045672172608, -88.183597799308 to
Driving Directions From 42.093160560894, -88.211147167359 to
Driving Directions From 42.088525008778, -88.079435634324 to
Driving Directions From 42.019747850993, -88.18113333394 to
Driving Directions From 42.085382467229, -88.07098341093 to