Kükürt Polimer Betonların Basınç Dayanımı ve Elastisite Modülüİlişkisinin Yönetmelikler Açısından Karşılaştırılması

Year 2023, Volume: 27 Issue: 3, 387 - 397, 25.12.2023

Onur Öztürk , Adnan Öner , Murat Karadeniz

Abstract

Üstün mekanik ve durabilite özellikleri ile kükürt polimer betonlar (KPB)
geleneksel Portland çimento betonlarına (PÇB) alternatif yapı malzemesi olarak son
yıllarda ön plana çıkmıştır. Betonun önemli bir tasarım parametresi olan elastisite
modülü ile ilgili araştırmaların KPB’ler açısından literatürde yetersiz olduğu ve
standartlarda önerilen tahmin modellerinde halen göz önünde bulundurulmadığı
görülmektedir. Bundan dolayı bu çalışma kapsamında, KPB’lerin basınç dayanımıelastisite modülü ilişkisinin uluslararası standartlarca önerilmiş olan analitik
modeller ve geleneksel PÇB’ler ile karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Deneysel çalışma sonucunda KBP’lerin elastisite modüllerinin, benzer basınç
dayanımı değerlerine sahip PÇB’lere göre daha düşük değerlerde kaldığı
belirlenmiştir. PÇB’ler için standartlarda önerilmiş olan analitik modellerin
KPB’lerin elastisite modülleri tahmininde ACI 363R-92 ve NS 3473 standartları
haricinde yaklaşık değerler elde edilemediği görülmüştür. Deneysel çalışmadaki
veriler kullanılarak bu çalışma kapsamında yeni bir analitik model önerilmiştir.
Önerilen analitik model, yakın sonuç veren standartlardaki modeller ile istatistiki
olarak karşılaştırmalı incelenmiş ve önerilen modelin deneysel değerlere en yakın
sonuçları verdiği belirlenmiştir

Keywords

Kükürt, Kükürt Polimer Beton, Elastisite Modülü, Basınç Dayanımı

Comparison of Design Guidelines for Relationship of Sulfur Polymer Concrete Compressive Strength and Modulus of Elasticity

Abstract

Sulfur polymer concrete (SPC) with its superior mechanical and
durability properties has come to the fore in recent years as an alternative
construction material to traditional Portland cement concrete (PCC). It is seen that
the studies on the modulus of elasticity, which is an important design parameter of
concrete, are insufficient in the literature for SPC and are still not considered in the
prediction models suggested in the standards. This study aims to examine the
compressive strength-modulus of elasticity relationship of SPC comparatively with
analytical models proposed by international standards and traditional PPC. As a
result of the experimental study, it was determined that the modulus of elasticity of
SPC remained at lower values than PCC with similar compressive strength values. It
was observed that the analytical models proposed in the standards for PCC could
not obtain approximate values for the estimation of the modulus of elasticity of SPC,
except for the ACI 363R-92 and NS 3473 standards. A new analytical model was
proposed using the experimental data within the scope of this study. The proposed
analytical model was statistically compared with the models in the standards that
gave close results, and it was determined that the proposed model gave the closest
results to the experimental values.

Keywords

Sulfur, Sulfur Polymer Concrete, Modulus of Elasticity, Compressive Strength

References

• [1] Miller, S.A., Moore F.C. 2020. Climate and health damages from global concrete production. Nature Climate Change, 10, 439-443.
• [2] Ghasemi S., Nikudel M.R., Zalooli A., Khamehchiyan M., Alizadeh A., Yousefvand F., Ghasemi A.M.R. 2022. Durability Assessment of Sulfur Concrete and Portland Concrete in Laboratory Conditions and Marine Environments. Journal of Materials Civil Engineering, 34(8), 1-14.
• [3] Kurad R., Silvestre J.D., Brito J., Ahmed H. 2017. Effect of incorporation of high volume of recycled concrete aggregates and fly ash on the strength and global warming potential of concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 485-502.
• [4] Kartam N., Al-Mutairi N., Al-Ghusain I., Al- Humoud J. 2004. Environmental management of construction and demolition waste in Kuwait. Waste Management, 24, 1049-1059.
• [5] Mehta P.K. 2009. Global concrete industry sustainability. Concrete International, 31(2), 45- 48.
• [6] Wagenfeld J.G., Khalid A.A., Almheiri S., Slavens A.F., Calvet N. 2019. Sustainable Applications Utilizing Sulfur, A By-Product from Oil and Gas Industry: A State of the Art Review. Waste Management, 95, 78-89.
• [7] Bacon R.F., Davis H.S. 1921. Recent Advances in the American Sulfur Industry, Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, 24, 65-72.
• [8] Mohamed A.M.O., El Gamal M.M. 2009. HydroMechanical Behavior of a Newly Developed Sulfur Polymer Concrete. Cement & Concrete Composites, 31, 186-194.
• [9] You X. 2021. Research progress of the modification in sulfur concrete. Materials Sciences and Applications, 12, 353-361.
• [10]Öztürk O. 2019. Kükürt ve Kükürt Polimer Betonların Mekanik ve Dayanıklılık Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, 232s, Kocaeli.
• [11]Öztürk O., Öner A. 2020. Investigation of Long Term Mechanical Properties of Sulphur Polymer Concrete and Comparison with Portland Cement Concrete. Erzincan University Journal of Science and Technology, 13(3), 1252-1262.
• [12]Hager I., Golonka A., Putanowicz R. 2016. 3D Printing of Buildings and Building Components as the Future of Sustainable Construction. Procedia Engineering, 151, 292-299.
• [13]Al-Otaibi S., Al-Aibani A., Al-Bahar S., Abdulsalam M., Al-Fadala S. 2018. Potential for Producing Concrete Blocks Using Sulphur PolymericConcrete in Kuwait. Journal of King Saud UniversityEngineering Sciences, 31(4), 327-331.
• [14]Shin M., Kim K., Gwon S.W., Cha S. 2014. Durability of Sustainable Sulfur Concrete with Fly Ash and Recycled Aggregate Against Chemical and Weathering Environments. Construction and Building Materials, 69, 167-176.
• [15]Yang C., Lv X., Tian X., Wang Y., Komarneni S. 2014. An Investigation on the Use of Electrolytic Manganese Residue as Filler in Sulfur Concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 73, 305-310.
• [16]Contreras M., Gazquez M.J., Garcia-Diaz I., Alguacil F.J., Lopez F.A., Bolivar J.P. 2013. Valorization of Waste Ilmenite Mud in the Manufacture of Sulphur Polymer Cement. Journal of Environmental Management, 128, 625-630.
• [17]Mohammadi A., Dehastani M., Asce A.M., Shooshpasha I., Asadollahi S. 2014. Mechanical Properties of Sandy Soil Stabilized with Modified Sulfur. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 27(4), 1-7.
• [18]Karadeniz M., Öztürk O., Kara Z.E., Opan M. 2022. Düşük basınçlı kükürt enjeksiyonunun serbest basınç mukavemetine etkisi. Kırklareli University Journal of Engineering and Science, 8(2), 322-342.
• [19]Türkel E.B. 2002. Betonda Basınç Dayanımı ile Elastisite Modülü Arasındaki İlişkiler. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 79s, İstanbul.
• [20]Öztürk O., Öner A. 2022. Long-term Durability of Bitumen Modified Sulfur Polymer Concrete Under Freeze–Thaw Cycles. Int J Civ Eng, 20, 529–543.
• [21]ASTM C-469, 2014. Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio of Concrete in Compression. American Society for Testing and Materials, Pennsylvania.
• [22]Tangüner R. 2007. Uçucu Küllü Düşük ve Yüksek Mukavemetli Betonların Elastiklik Modülünün İncelenmesi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 75s, İstanbul.
• [23]Vakhshhouri B., Nejadi S. 2019. Empirical models and design codes in prediction of modulus of elasticity of concrete. Front Struct Civ Eng, 13(1), 38-48.
• [24]TS 500, 2000. Betonarme Yapıların Hesap ve Yapım Kuralları, Türk Standartları Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• [25]ACI 363R-92,1984. Materials and General Properties of Concrete, ACI Manual of Concrete Practice Part 1, Michigan.
• [26]CEB-FIB, 1993. CEB-FIB Model Code for Concrete Structures, Committee Euro-International du Beton, Michigan.
• [27]NS 3473, 2003. Concrete Structures - Design and Detailing Rules, Norwegian Standards, Norway.
• [28]EN 1992-1-1, 2004. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures-Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
• [29]BS 5400-4, 1990. Steel, concrete and composite bridges, Part 4: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges, British Standard, UK.
• [30]VBC, 1995. Voorschriften Beton TGB 1990, Constructieve Eisen en Rekenmethoden, Nederlandse.
• [31]SP-52-101, 2003. Concrete and reinforced concrete structures without prestressing, In Gosstroi of Russia, Moscow.
• [32]Yazıcı Ş., İnan Sezer G. 2007. The effect of cylindrical specimen size on the compressive strength of concrete. Building and Environment, 42, 2417-2420.
• [33]Hammons M.I., Simith D.M., Wilson D.E., Reece C.S. 1993. Investigation of Modified Sulfur Concrete as a Structural Material. Construction Productivity Advancement Research (CPAR) Program-Final Report, CPAR-SL-93-1