Compatibility between superplasticizer admixtures and cements with mineral additions

By O. Burgos-Montes, M. Palacios, Patricia Rivilla, F. Puertas. 2012

239 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Effects of the charge characteristics of polycarboxylate superplasticizers on the adsorption and the retardation in cement pastes (2015, background): “[12] found that the traditional admixtures such as lignosulfonate and sulfonated naphthalene-type superplasticizers had high adsorption values on cement and they supposed that the adsorption was related to the charge density and the configuration of the adsorbed molecules.”
Correlations of the dispersing capability of NSF and PCE types of superplasticizer and their impacts on cement hydration with the adsorption in fresh cement pastes (2015, background): “Similar observations have been well documented, which present that at least twice as much NSF as PCE is needed to achieve similar rheological properties of cement pastes [3,27,28].”
Rheology of alkali-activated slag pastes. Effect of the nature and concentration of the activating solution (2014, background): “Many authors have studied Portland cement paste rheology as a preliminary to determining the rheology of the respective mortars and concretes [3–9].”
Compatibility between polycarboxylate-based admixtures and blended-cement pastes (2013, unknown): “2 mg/g of limestone, due to its high positive zeta potential (+13 mV) [37].”