Section 3 – CONCRETE

Subsection : 3.3.3. Aggregate Proportionning

Question

FR: Sachant que tous les agrégats passants le tamis 75 um sont considérés comme des particules fines, il faut que ces passants soit considérés dans la catégorie des solides du mélange. Avec la microbille de verre, nous avons trouvé que le pourcentage retenu sur le tamis 177 um est de 5% pour la microbille k15 de la compagnie 3M. En revanche, le pourcentage de retenu sur le tamis 75 um pour la plus petite dimension de particule (microbille S22 de la compagnie 3M) est aussi de 5%. La question est donc :

Pouvons nous considérer que 100% du volume de ces deux types de microbilles est du “mineral filler”, c’est-à-dire passant le tamis no 200?

EN: Knowing that all the aggregates passing the sieve 75 um are considered as fine particles, it is necessary to consider them as mineral filler. With the glass microbead, we found that the percentage retained on the 177 μm sieve is 5% for the 3M k15 microbead. On the other hand, the percentage retained on the 75 μm sieve for the smallest particle size (S22 microbead of the 3M company) is also 5%. The question is: Can we consider that 100% of the volume of these two types of microbeads is “mineral filler”, that is, passing the No. 200 sieve?

Answer

After reading the data sheet it appears that the microbead S22, due to its physical properties, can be considered a filler at 100%.

On the other hand, for the K15 microbead you have to separate the pass and the refusal of the sieve N. 200 since the maximum effective size of the granules is greater than 80 microns