• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.124.1-124
• /
• 2003

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.168.1-168
• /
• 2003

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.130.1-130
• /
• 2003

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2000.10a
• /
• pp.205.2-205
• /
• 2000

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2002.10a
• /
• pp.81.2-81
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2002.10a
• /
• pp.125.1-125
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2002.10a
• /
• pp.210.1-210
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Korean Ceranic Society Conference
• /
• 2003.10a
• /
• pp.80.2-80
• /
• 2003

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2016.05a
• /
• pp.32-33
• /
• 2016

In this work, pozzolanic activities of various waste materials were compared with those of well-known pozzolanic materials. Uncondensed and densified silica fume, two ASTM class F fly ashes with different calcium contents, and bentonite powder, ceramic powder obtained from wash basin, and waste glass wool, which can possibly possess pozzolanic property were chosen for comparison. Drop in electrical conductivity at 40℃ saturated lime solution was measured for each materials. The amount of Ca(OH)₂ decomposed from cement paste at 450~500℃ was also measured used to evaluate pozzolanic activity. The 28 day compressive strength were used to observe the mechanical property enhanced by various waste materials.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.386-392
• /
• 2012

In this study, life cycle cost (LCC) is analyzed according to insulation panel system type using a deterministic LCC analysis method. Through this analysis, it was found that the construction cost in the deterministic LCC analysis for Ceramic panels was low compared to the construction cost for metal and stone panels. Also, the difference in cost between the Ceramic panel and the metal panel was about 2 times. In the area of maintenance cost, it was found to be similar to the previously analyzed construction cost, in which the metal panel has the highest cost due to the high cost of construction and the frequent need for maintenance. In the case of the stone panel, a small difference in cost is shown compared with that of the Ceramic panel, but the cost is higher than the Ceramic panel. Regarding the cost of waste disposal, the Ceramic panel can reduce the cost by at least 1.5 times and up to 2 times compared to other panel systems. Finally, in the analysis of sensitivity according to changes in discount rates, the Ceramic panel and metal panel systems have a similar cost, and the cost of the metal panel is a bit larger than that of other panel systems. Thus, in the subjects used in the analysis, the Ceramic panel system shows the highest economic benefits.