Coimbra, Portugal, 2012

OPTIMIZAO DE GROUTS PARA CONSOLIDAO DE ALVENARIAS ANTIGAS (GROUT OPTIMISATION FOR OLD MASONRY CONSOLIDATION)
Luis G. Baltazar 1*, Fernando M.A. Henriques 2 e Fernando Jorne 2
1: Departamento de Engenharia Civil Faculdade de Cincias e Tecnologia Universidade Nova de Lisboa 2829-516 Caparica e-mail: luis.baltazar@fct.unl.pt, web: http://www.dec.fct.unl.pt 2: Departamento de Engenharia Civil Faculdade de Cincias e Tecnologia Universidade Nova de Lisboa 2829-516 Caparica e-mail: {fh, jforne}@fct.unl.pt web: http://www.dec.fct.unl.pt

Palavras-chave: Grouts de cal hidrulica, Reologia, Molhabilidade, Alvenarias antigas Resumo. As construes em alvenaria representam uma parcela significativa da rea construda em Portugal e a sua preservao requer muitas vezes necessidade de consolidao com vista melhoria das suas caractersticas estruturais. Uma das tcnicas de consolidao consiste na injeco de grouts (caldas) no interior das alvenarias, permitindo criar ligaes entre elementos da alvenaria e aumentar a sua compacidade, atravs do preenchimento dos vazios existentes no ncleo da alvenaria. Porm, para melhorar a capacidade de injeco imprescindvel a optimizao da composio do grout com vista a assegurar um adequado escoamento no meio poroso. Neste sentido, apresenta-se a influncia de superplastificante e de slica de fumo nas suas propriedades reologicas e molhabilidade de grouts base de cal hidrulica. A escassez de informao cientfica acerca de grouts base de cal hidrulica com superplastificante e slica de fumo na sua composio justifica a realizao da investigao sobre o assunto. Este trabalho insere-se no mbito de um projecto de investigao mais vasto que visa contribuir para o aumento de conhecimento da comunidade cientfica e da indstria sobre o assunto. Keywords: Hydraulic lime grouts, Rheology, Wettability, Old masonry walls Abstract. The injection of grouts inside multi-leafs stone masonries is a technique widely used for structural consolidation. To ensure an adequate flow of the grout inside the masonry it is crucial to assure good fresh grout properties. The scope of this paper is to provide preliminary indications and valuable data about the effects of specific hydraulic lime grout composition on their rheological behaviour and wettability with the purpose of a successful injection process. Through the use of rotational rheometer together with goniometer it was possible to study the influence of water/binder ratio; superplasticizer concentration and the partial replacement of hydraulic lime by silica fume, upon the grout rheological properties and wettability. The study leads to the conclusion that the water/binder ratio and superplasticizer dosage are the most determinant factors in the fresh grout rheological behaviour. On the other hand, silica fume dosage turned out to be the factor with the least contribution to improve the grout rheological behaviour compared to the other two factors reported in this study. The results summarised in this communication is a contribution to the improvement of knowledge affecting both the scientific community and industry .

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

1. INTRODUCTION Heritage or common old buildings represent the large majority of the construction types in many urban centers in Portugal. Their masonries frequently present a bad state of conservation and present very different characteristics; some are made of a single leaf, while others have multi-leaf walls. In the case of a multi-leaf walls, the section is composed by two resistant external leaves and an internal space filled by small stones, sand, mortar or other kind of unbounded material [1]. The absence of cohesion among masonry elements, the existence of voids and cracks as well as the poor connection between leaves lead to masonries with non-monolithic behaviour. In order to stabilize such walls and to prevent structural failure grout injection is a current consolidation technique. The grout injection allows the increase of masonry compactness and creates bonds between the internal and external leafs. Grouts for injection purpose should be adequately designed to achieve the best performance in terms of the injectability. This means that fresh grout properties, such as rheological properties, seem to be as important as the ones in the hardened state, since the good rheological properties is an essential criterion to allow the correct flow of the grout inside the masonry to ensure the filling of the voids. Grouts by definition are mixes of binder and water. However those simple mixes are unable to perform an efficient consolidation, therefore requiring the use of additives and admixtures, such as superplasticizers, silica fume, which efficiency has been consistently shown in literature for the case of cement based mixes [2] [3] [4]. However, little information is presently known regarding the effect of these materials in fresh behaviour of hydraulic lime grouts. The main goal of this work is to test different superplasticizer concentration; water/binder ratio and silica fume replacement dosage in order to understand their influence in rheological parameters (such as yield stress and plastic viscosity) and in wettability of natural hydraulic lime grout. The choice of hydraulic lime as binder is a consequence of its chemical and physical properties being closer to those of the pre-existing materials in old masonries [5]. Being so, this research has particular relevance due to lack of information about the use of superplasticizers and silica fume in natural hydraulic lime grouts, compared to the amount of information that exists in the case of Portland cement based mixes [6] [7].

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1. Material studied The experimental program was carried out using grouts made with hydraulic lime. The hydraulic lime used is a EN459-1:2010 NHL5 produced in Portugal by Secil-Martingana. A commercially available silica fume was used, namely undensified silica fume produced by MAPEI. Silica fume is an ultrafine powder that works as pozzolan and is a by-product of the silicon metal production using electric arc furnaces. When silica fume is added, it will contribute to the formation of additional C-S-H (calcium silicate hydrate) and it is expected that the small and spherical silica fume particles will fill the voids between binder particles and produce a ball-bearing effect [8]. The superplasticizer used was a polycarboxilate (Glenium Sky 617) produced by BASF. This type of superplasticizer induces solid particle repulsion predominantly through steric hindrance in addition to ionization dispersion forces [9] [10]. The steric repulsion protects binder particles from flocculation, this repulsion arising from the long side chain polymer which hold the particles far enough so that they cannot come together. . 2.2. Mixing procedures The hydraulic lime mixes were prepared at a room temperature of 202C and a relative humidity of 602%. The mixing procedure adopted was the following [11]: the whole powder (binder + additive) is 2

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

added to 70% of total mix water and mixed during 10 min. Then, the remaining water (with diluted admixture) is added within 30 s (without stopping the mixer). After all materials had been added, the mixture was maintained for an additional 3 min at 800 rpm. The blade used for the mixes had a helicoidally shape. 2.3. Rheological measurements Rheological proprieties were evaluated with a Bohlin Gemin HRnano rotational rheometer (fig. 1), equipped with a plate-plate geometry (fig. 2) and a gap of 2 mm. The grout samples were analysed 10 min after the mixing process had ended. In all measures, a pre-shearing stage of 30 s at shear rate of 1 s-1 followed by 60 s at rest was applied. Then, the shear rate was increased from 0 to 300 s-1 each shear rate has been applied long enough until the steady state was reached. All grout samples were analyzed with a constant temperature of 20 C, maintained by means of a temperature unit control.

Figure 1. Rotational rheometer

Figure 2. Rheometer equipped with plateplate geometry

The fresh grout properties, such as rheological ones, can be used as a control factors to know if a grout is suitable to be injected. From the injection point of view the yield stress and viscosity are some the most important rheological parameters. The yield stress is associated with the minimum stress that is necessary to apply for the grout to start flowing, while the plastic viscosity represents the flow resistance once flow is initiated. This means that a smaller yield value and plastic viscosity means an easier injection process with lower pressures Based on previous tests it is known that the rheological behaviour of fresh hydraulic lime grouts is a shear-thinning behaviour i.e. decreasing of viscosity with increasing of shear rate [11] [12]. Knowing the behaviour of hydraulic lime grouts as a shear-thinning fluid, the modified Bingham model was used to fit the experimental data in order to estimate the plastic viscosity and yield stress [13]: = 0 + p + c 2

(1)

where is the shear stress (Pa), 0 is the yield stress (Pa), p is the plastic viscosity (Pa.s), is the shear rate and c is a constant with no relevant meaning.

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

2.4. Wettability measurement The grout wettability is directly related to its ability to retain the mixing water; this means that a grout with lower wettability is better from injection point of view since a less amount of water will be absorbed by the support/surface over which the grout flows. The abilities of the superplasticizer concentration, water/binder ratio and silica fume replacement dosage to alter the wettability of hydraulic lime grouts was examined. The grout wettability was characterized by contact angle measurements. The contact angle is a quantitative measure of an angle () (fig. 3) and it quantifies the wettability of a solid surface by a liquid. The contact angles were determined using a sessile drop apparatus as shown in fig. 4a (Goniometer KSV instruments). In this study the measurements were carried out under a glass surface (which is a polar surface as the most of construction materials).

Figure 3. Contact angle () measurement of a liquid drop on a glass substrate (adapted from [14]) The measurements were carried out as follows: the glass surface was first cleaned with acetone and it was then placed in a horizontal position in the sessile drop apparatus. A droplet of grout was carefully dispensed onto the glass (fig. 4b), and an image of the droplet making contact with the glass surface was captured by a video camera (fig. 5). The image was subsequently processed with software (by KSV instruments) to determine the contact angle. All measurements were made at room temperature of 22 2C.

(a)

(b) Figure 4. (a) Goniometer; (b) Grout drop onto the glass surface

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

Figure 5. Image of a grout drop onto the glass surface captured by a video camera A high contact angle () (fig. 3) indicates a grout with low affinity for the polar surface (poor wetting). This means that a high contact angle is desire to get a grout with lower wettability and, as a result, with lesser water loss. Since higher water absorption by the support will cause obstruction of the injection channel and blocking further injection. These effects lead to the occurrence of areas (inside the porous media to be injected) with differential binder concentration that, in the worst scenario, lead to grout flowing away and leaving empty zones without any binder, as shown by the experimental results of Jorne et al [15]. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The grouts were prepared with different superplasticizer concentration (0.3wt%; 0,5wt%; 0,7wt%; 0.9wt% and 1.2wt%), as well as different water/binder content (0.45; 0.50; 0.55 and 0.65) and different silica fume replacement dosage (0wt%; 5wt%; 10wt%; 15 wt% and 20wt%) were studied, in order to analyse their effect on grout rheology. For each grout plots of variation of shear stress as a function of shear rate were analysed. Fig. 6 shows the type of curve obtained from the mean values since at least three repetitions of each mix were performed.
300 Shear Stress (Pa) 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 100 200 300 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 100 200 300 Shear rate (1/s)

Shear rate (1/s)

(a)

Apparent Viscosity (Pa.s)

(b)

Figure 6. Typical rheogram of a hydraulic lime based grout. (a) shear stress vs shear rate; (b) apparent viscosity vs shear rate

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

The yield stress and plastic viscosity values were calculated from the fitting of eq. 1 on the flow curves (as described in rheological measurements). 3.1. Influence of superplasticizer concentration on the rheological properties According to the fig 7 the increase of superplasticizer concentration decreases the viscosity and yield stress values, achieving the lowest value for the higher concentration. From fig 7 it is evident that a considerable decrease of yield stress and viscosity occurs between the 0.3wt% and 0.7wt%, whereas for concentrations above of 0.7wt% the decreasing trend begins to stabilize. These results are in accordance with the conclusions obtained by Wallevik et al [16] for cement pastes; their research shows that polycarboxylate-ether based superplasticizer addition could reduce the yield stress and plastic viscosity. Since the superplasticizer imposes repulsive forces that prevent the particle flocculation. But doing so, also the amount of water trapped within flocks will be released, increasing the free water available for grout workability. A higher superplasticizer concentration means higher amount of superplasticizer available to disperse the particles, resulting in a larger dispersion of the grout and a decrease of yield stress. However, some authors suggested that superplasticizer when used at higher concentration have the reverse effect [17]. This phenomenon is called depletion attraction which is caused by an excessive concentration of superplasticizer in the liquid phase that will be the source of an osmotic pressure over the binder particles forcing the particles flocculation that could cause negative effects, such as segregation and bleeding problems. From a practical point of view can be stated that a superplasticizer concentration of 1% per weight of binder it allows to obtain a grout with good workability. 0,09 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,03 0,02 0,01 0,00 0,3% 0,5% 0,7% 10 8 6 4 2 0 0,9% 1,2% Yield stress (Pa)

Plastic viscosity Yield stress

Plastic viscosity (Pa.s)

Superplasticizer concentration (% per binder weight) Figure 7. Effect of superplasticizer concentration on the plastic viscosity and yield stress

3.2. Influence of silica fume replacement dosage on the rheological properties The increase of plastic viscosity with the silica fume replacement is shown in fig 8 resulting from the progressive increase of the surface area effect [6]. Since silica fume specific surface is about four times higher than hydraulic line, the mix water available per surface area decreases resulting in a more viscous grout. In the case of yield stress, it shows a slight increase (nearly constant value) up to 10wt% replacement; this behaviour is probably due to the replacement of irregular hydraulic lime particles by smaller and spherical shape silica fume particles [18] which contribute not only to a less mono-sized suspension but also to a lubricant effect that facilitates the beginning of grout flow (low yield stress). However, for higher silica fume dosages (above 10wt%) the yield stress values increase

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

considerably this can be due to the fact that silica fume dosage is above the percolation threshold value, based on the Krieger-Dougherty equation a decrease of mix fluidity is entirely dependent of the concentration of the particles i.e. solid volume fraction [19] [20]. This means that silica fume replacement up to 10wt% can be considered acceptable from the rheological and hardened performance point of view. Since, according to Kadri et al [6] the presence of silica fume has also a slight accelerating effect on the early age strength development. 0,09 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,03 0,02 0,01 0,00 0
plastic viscosity Yield stress

10 8 6 4 2 0 Yield stress (Pa) Yield stress (Pa)

Plastic visocsity (Pa.s)

10

15

20

Silica fume replacement dosage (% per binder weight) Figure 8. Effect of silica fume replacement dosage on the plastic viscosity and yield stress 3.3. Influence of water/binder ratio on the rheological properties The water/binder ratio has a similar behaviour of the SP dosage, however simple addition of water to make the grout more fluid is an inappropriate option because a higher water/binder ratio will weaken the grout in the hardened state, and it will increase the shrinkage deformations and increase the free water amount that also contributes to instability phenomena [17]. Fig. 9 represents the evolution of yield stress and plastic viscosity as function of water/binder ration. It can be noted that it is a significant decrease in viscosity up to the water/binder ratio of 0.50, while for higher water dosages the viscosity tends to stabilize. This means an approximation to a Newtonian fluid behaviour, so in case of an abrupt decrease in pressure occurring during the grout injection does not stop the flow. Nevertheless, to ensure an adequate binder hydration and a good performance in both fresh and hardened state it is recommended a water/binder ratio of 0.50. 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,10 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0,00 0,45 0,50 Plastic viscosity (Pa.s)
Plastic viscosity Yield stress

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

0,55

0,65

water/binder ratio (-) Figure 9. Effect of water/binder ratio on the plastic viscosity and yield stress

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

3.4. Effects of grout composition on the wettability The grouts were prepared with different superplasticizer concentration (0.5wt%; 0.9wt% and 1.2wt%), as well as different w/b content (0.45; 0.50; 0.55) and different silica fume replacement dosage (5wt%; 10wt%; 15wt%) were studied, in order to analyse their effect on grout wettability. Table 1 shows the contact angle of grouts with different superplasticizer concentration. As seen, the contact angle was decreased from 61.6 to 45.9; this was a significant alteration on grout wettability. Cleary, the superplasticizer is a polar substance that contributes to the increased of the grout polarity and increasing its wettability (high affinity for the glass surface). This behaviour can be explained through the superpasticizer action. The superplasticizer is in the form of sodium salts (COONa) which undergo dissociation in water; after that the superplasticizer will present negative charge along its carboxylic main chain (COO-). According to Ran et al [21] the adsorption of superplasticizer onto binder surface is mainly driven by an electrostatic interaction between the positive surface of the cement and the anionic COO- group; this adsorption will be responsible for the repulsive interparticle force that avoids the formation of agglomerates. Based on the achieved results can be stated that a superplasticizer concentration of around 1wt% is suitable for fresh grout performance both in terms of rheology and wettability. Table 1. Effect of superplasticizer concentration on grout contact angle Superplasticizer concentration (wt%) 0.5 0.9 1.2 Contact angle () 61.6 56.1 45.9 Coefficient of variation (%) 1.5 0.5 4.6

Table 2 shows the contact angle of grouts containing different silica fume replacement dosages. It is noted that increase the silica fume replacement dosage has a week effect on contact angle. However it can be noted a small decrease of contact angle with the increase of silica fume dosage; this behaviour contrast with the results obtained on rheological measurements where the grout fluidity becomes worst with higher silica fume replacement dosage. This may be explained based on the experimental results of Kadri et al [6] the silica fume particles adsorbs relatively low amounts of superplasticizer when compared with adsorption on the binder particles; resulting in a increasing of superplasticizer available. As the superplasticizer is a polar substance (as shown by the results in table 1) the contact angles slight decrease with the increase of silica fume replacement dosage. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean an improvement in the rheological behaviour, since it is believed that the increasing surface area with increasing lime replacement by silica fume has a greater preponderance. As the fresh grout is dominated by the volume fraction and friction in the particle suspension (as a result of the fact that major part of the particles are of colloidal size) so the colloidal force will dominate the rheology of the grout, despite the fact that the superplasticizer is less adsorbed by the silica fume particles. On the other hand it is believed that grout wettability is mainly controlled by electrostatic affinity (chemical polarity) between the grout and the surface rather than the solid volume faction in the grout composition. In the case of water/binder ratio, it can be observed that when the water/binder ratio is increased, the contact angle decreases (table 3) that indicates a more polar grout which spreads easily in the glass surface i.e. with high wettability capacity. Taking into account these results; the rheological measurements and other consequences of an excessive water dosage (such as instability phenomenon and mechanical performance) the water/binder ratio should not exceed 0.50.

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

Table 2. Effect of silica fume replacement dosage on grout contact angle Silica fume replacement dosage (wt%) 5 10 15 Contact angle () 36.7 35.6 30.3 Coefficient of variation (%) 2.1 1.9 3.8

Table 3. Effect of water/binder ratio on grout contact angle Water/binder ratio (-) 0.45 0.50 0.55 Contact angle () 47.7 34.0 30.5 Coefficient of variation (%) 2.6 2.4 1.2

4. CONCLUSIONS In the light of the achieved results, it is clear that the water/binder ratio and superplasticizer concentration are the most determinant factors in the fresh grout behaviour; nevertheless they are not able to decrease the grout wettability and indirectly to increase its water retention capability. An increase in dosage of these two factors resulted in a more fluid grout. Nevertheless, the superplasticizer concentration of 0.9wt% and a water/binder ratio of 0.5 can be considered acceptable according to the fresh characteristics measured in laboratory. On the other hand, the use of silica fume revealed a poor contribution on the rheological behaviour of hydraulic lime grouts since increased amounts of silica fume lead to worse rheological performance. This conclusion is in accordance with other authors that concluded that silica fume tends to reduce the workability of cementitious mixes [22]. However, silica fume replacement up to 10wt% can be considered acceptable from the rheological performance point of view, since the yield stress remains almost unchanged and the viscosities still allow adequate flows of grout. In addition the results had shown that silica fume as a reduced influence on the grout wettability. So, it may be stated that the addition of a small dosage of silica fume can be acceptable in hydraulic lime grouts because it does not significantly affects the grout injection and according to the literature [8] [15] [24] it may improve their properties in the hardened state. It is clear, however, that additional characterization of the flow and injection processes are needed, due to the complex composition of grouts and the complex interaction of flows. In terms of injection process, the grouts injection capacity in physical models is currently being analysed by studying the influence of grout compositions on the injectability of different porous media that simulate the core of old masonry walls [15].

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is part of the research project PTDC/ECM/104376/2008, founded by FCT/MCTES, Portugal. The authors would like to acknowledge the support of: Eng. Dina Frade (Secil-Martingana) for the supply of hydraulic lime; Dr. Teresa Cidade and Dr. Ana Ramos for their contribution with rheometry and goniometry, respectively; and Eng. Ana Santos, who contributed to materials preparation.

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] E. N. Vintzileou, Three-Leaf Masonry in Compression, Before and After Grouting: A Review of Literature, International Journal of Architectural Heritage, vol. 5, pp. 513538, 2011. L. Rudzinski, The effect of fly ashes on the rheological behaviour of cement pastes, Matriaux et Constructions, vol. 17, pp. 369373, 1984. I. Demir and M. Serhat Baspinar, Effect of silica fume and expanded perlite addition on the technical properties of the fly ashlimegypsum mixture, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 12991304, Jun. 2008. P. Chindaprasirt, Effect of fly ash fineness on compressive strength and pore size of blended cement paste, Cement and Concrete Composites, vol. 27, pp. 425428, 2005. L. Binda, Repair and investigation techniques for stone masonry walls, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 133142, 1997. E.-H. Kadri, S. Aggoun, and G. De Schutter, Interaction between C3A, silica fume and naphthalene sulphonate superplasticiser in high performance concrete, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 31243128, Oct. 2009. C. Artelt and E. Garcia, Impact of superplasticizer concentration and of ultra-fine particles on the rheological behaviour of dense mortar suspensions, Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 633642, May 2008. S. Shihada and M. Arafa, Effects of Silica Fume, Ultrafine and Mixing Sequences on Properties of Ultra High Performance Concrete, Asian Journal of Materials Science, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 137146, Mar. 2010. V. Hedda, "Rheology and reactivity of cementitious binders with plasticizers". Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2005, Doctoral thesis. N. Mikanovic and C. Jolicoeur, Influence of superplasticizers on the rheology and stability of limestone and cement pastes, Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 907919, Jul. 2008. L. G. Baltazar, F. M. a. Henriques, and F. Jorne, Optimisation of flow behaviour and stability of superplasticized fresh hydraulic lime grouts through design of experiments, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 35, pp. 838845, Oct. 2012. A. Bras, F. M. a. Henriques, and M. T. Cidade, Effect of environmental temperature and fly ash addition in hydraulic lime grout behaviour, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 15111517, Aug. 2010. H. A. Barnes, A handbook of elementary rheology. Institute of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics, University of Wales, 2000. R. Pichot, F. Spyropoulos, and I. T. Norton, Competitive adsorption of surfactants and hydrophilic silica particles at the oil-water interface: interfacial tension and contact angle studies., Journal of colloid and interface science, vol. 377, no. 1, pp. 396405, Jul. 2012. F. Jorne, F. M. A. Henriques, and L. G. Baltazar, Grout injection in porous media with different internal structures, in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference - Structural Faults & Repair, Scotland, 3rd 5th July, 2012. O. H. Wallevik and J. E. Wallevik, Rheology as a tool in concrete science: The use of rheographs and workability boxes, Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 1279 1288, Dec. 2011. P. F. G. Banfill, Additivity effects in the rheology of fresh concrete containing water-reducing admixtures, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 29552960, Jun. 2011. A. I. Laskar and S. Talukdar, Rheological behavior of high performance concrete with mineral admixtures and their blending, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 2345 2354, Dec. 2008. Leslie Struble and Guo-Kuang Sun, Viscosity of Portland Cem en t Paste as a Function of Concentration Krieger-Dougherty Equation, Advanced Cement Based Materials, vol. 7355, no. 2, 1995.

[4] [5] [6]

[7]

[8]

[9] [10]

[11]

[12]

[13] [14]

[15]

[16]

[17] [18]

[19]

10

Luis G. Baltazar, Fernando Henriques and Fernando Jorne

[20]

[21]

[22] [23]

[24]

T. H. Phan, M. Chaouche, and M. Moranville, Influence of organic admixtures on the rheological behaviour of cement pastes, Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 36, pp. 1807 1813, 2006. Q. Ran, P. Somasundaran, C. Miao, J. Liu, S. Wu, and J. Shen, Adsorption Mechanism of Comb Polymer Dispersants at the Cement/Water Interface, Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 790798, May 2010. H. Justnes and H. Vikan, Viscosity of Cement Slurries as a Function of Solids Content, Anual transactions of the nordic rheology society, vol. 13, no. 7465, pp. 7582, 2005. L. Senff, J. a. Labrincha, V. M. Ferreira, D. Hotza, and W. L. Repette, Effect of nano-silica on rheology and fresh properties of cement pastes and mortars, Construction and Building Materials, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 24872491, Jul. 2009. M. J. Shannag, High-performance cementitious grouts for structural repair, Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 32, pp. 803808, 2002.

11