A Comparative Study of Concrete Strength Using Metamorphic, Igneous,and Sedimentary Rocks (Crushed Gneiss, Crushed Basalt, Alluvial Sand) asFine Aggregate

Mambou Ngueyep Luc Leroy, Tchapga Gniamsi Guy Molay, Ndop Joseph, Fofe Meli Colince, Ndjaka Jean Marie bienvenu
{"title":"A Comparative Study of Concrete Strength Using Metamorphic, Igneous,and Sedimentary Rocks (Crushed Gneiss, Crushed Basalt, Alluvial Sand) asFine Aggregate","authors":"Mambou Ngueyep Luc Leroy, Tchapga Gniamsi Guy Molay, Ndop Joseph, Fofe Meli Colince, Ndjaka Jean Marie bienvenu","doi":"10.4172/2168-9717.1000191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A comparative study of the technical and economic performances of hydraulic concretes based on three sands with different geological nature has been investigated in this work. Sand from crushed basalt (SB), sand from crushed gneiss (SG) and sand from the river Sanaga were used for the formulation of these concretes. The formulation of these concretes was carried out according to the method of ‘Dreux-Gorisse’. The results of the analysis show that concrete made from crushed basalt (CSB) has very good mechanical strengths (34 MPa at 28 days) followed by concrete made with alluvial sand (CSS), (24 MPa at 28 days) and finally concrete made from crushed gneiss(CSG), (22 MPa at 28 days). This is due to the fact that basalt is a compact rock, hard, tough and also consists of hard minerals such as olivine, plagioclase, clinopyroxene. Nevertheless concretes made with these sands are less malleable and have blemishes after stripping due to the angularity and very sharp edges of grains of sand. Fresh concrete (CSS) prepared with river sand is more malleable than the CSB concrete and CSG concrete. Besides the technical aspect, due to the cost of transport and the scarcity of river sand, concretes made with alluvial sand is more costly (49.893 FCFA/m3 of concrete) compared to concretes made with crushed gneiss and basalt costing 47.053 FCFA and 46.854 FCFA/m3 , respectively. In view of these results, it is therefore possible to replace river sand with quarry sands in the production of concrete and then reduce the environmental problems generated by the overconsumption of alluvial sand.","PeriodicalId":15092,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Architectural Engineering Technology","volume":"45 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Architectural Engineering Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9717.1000191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

A comparative study of the technical and economic performances of hydraulic concretes based on three sands with different geological nature has been investigated in this work. Sand from crushed basalt (SB), sand from crushed gneiss (SG) and sand from the river Sanaga were used for the formulation of these concretes. The formulation of these concretes was carried out according to the method of ‘Dreux-Gorisse’. The results of the analysis show that concrete made from crushed basalt (CSB) has very good mechanical strengths (34 MPa at 28 days) followed by concrete made with alluvial sand (CSS), (24 MPa at 28 days) and finally concrete made from crushed gneiss(CSG), (22 MPa at 28 days). This is due to the fact that basalt is a compact rock, hard, tough and also consists of hard minerals such as olivine, plagioclase, clinopyroxene. Nevertheless concretes made with these sands are less malleable and have blemishes after stripping due to the angularity and very sharp edges of grains of sand. Fresh concrete (CSS) prepared with river sand is more malleable than the CSB concrete and CSG concrete. Besides the technical aspect, due to the cost of transport and the scarcity of river sand, concretes made with alluvial sand is more costly (49.893 FCFA/m3 of concrete) compared to concretes made with crushed gneiss and basalt costing 47.053 FCFA and 46.854 FCFA/m3 , respectively. In view of these results, it is therefore possible to replace river sand with quarry sands in the production of concrete and then reduce the environmental problems generated by the overconsumption of alluvial sand.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用变质岩、火成岩和沉积岩(破碎片麻岩、破碎玄武岩、冲积砂)作为细骨料的混凝土强度比较研究
本文对三种不同地质性质的砂土水工混凝土的技术经济性能进行了比较研究。这些混凝土的配方使用了破碎的玄武岩砂(SB)、破碎的片麻岩砂(SG)和来自萨纳加河的砂。这些混凝土的配方是根据“Dreux-Gorisse”的方法进行的。分析结果表明,破碎玄武岩(CSB)混凝土具有较好的力学强度(28 d时为34 MPa),其次是冲积砂(CSS)混凝土(28 d时为24 MPa),最后是片麻岩(CSG)混凝土(28 d时为22 MPa)。这是因为玄武岩是一种致密的岩石,坚硬,坚韧,也由硬矿物组成,如橄榄石,斜长石,斜辉石。然而,用这些沙子制成的混凝土延展性较差,由于砂粒的棱角和非常锋利的边缘,剥离后会有瑕疵。用河砂配制的新拌混凝土(CSS)比CSB混凝土和CSG混凝土具有更好的延展性。除了技术方面,由于运输成本和河砂的稀缺性,与破碎片麻岩和玄武岩混凝土相比,冲积砂混凝土的成本更高(49.893 FCFA/m3混凝土),分别为47.053 FCFA和46.854 FCFA/m3。鉴于这些结果,因此在混凝土生产中可以用采石场砂代替河砂,从而减少冲积砂过度消耗所产生的环境问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Building Construction, Road Works and Waste Management: Impact of Anthropogenic Actions on Flooding in Yenagoa, Nigeria Thermomodernization of Historical Buildings with Residential Facades Better Natural Ventilation Design for Single Sided Apartments Utilising Computational Fluid Dynamics Application of Arduino-Based Systems as Monitoring Tools in Indoor Comfort Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis Optimization of Control Strategies for the Radiant Floor Cooling System Combined with Displacement Ventilation: A Case study of an Office Building in Jinan, China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1