Contribution to Comparative Study of Physical-Chemical Characteristics of Diack Basalt and Bandia Limestone for Use in Railway Engineering

A. Diédhiou, L. Sow, A. Dione
{"title":"Contribution to Comparative Study of Physical-Chemical Characteristics of Diack Basalt and Bandia Limestone for Use in Railway Engineering","authors":"A. Diédhiou, L. Sow, A. Dione","doi":"10.4236/gm.2020.102002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a comparative study of Physical-Chemical characteristics of Limestone and Basalt (from Senegalese quarries). First, chemical tests show that Basalt is richer in silica 51.59% versus 2.84% for Limestone. Basalt is made up of silica minerals and essentially carbonated minerals with a CaO percentage of 50.05%. Chemical results also show that Basalt is richer in iron 12.71% versus 0.44% for Limestone. Finally, they revealed a fire loss of 40.91% for Limestone and 2.44% for Basalt. Second, physical analysis results show that Diack Basalt has the best characteristics with a flattening coefficient of 5% between 5% and 20%; the percentage of pollutants is 0.36% less than 1%; the Los Angeles coefficient is 12.21% below 15, while Bandia Limestone gives a flattening coefficient of 3%; the Los Angeles coefficient of 40.17% and the percentage of pollutant (2.4%) well above 2%. It is noted that the percentage of Limestone pollutant is too high. These important results show the net advantage of Basalt compared to Limestone in terms of physical-chemical characteristics.","PeriodicalId":67978,"journal":{"name":"地质材料(英文)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"地质材料(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1089","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/gm.2020.102002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative study of Physical-Chemical characteristics of Limestone and Basalt (from Senegalese quarries). First, chemical tests show that Basalt is richer in silica 51.59% versus 2.84% for Limestone. Basalt is made up of silica minerals and essentially carbonated minerals with a CaO percentage of 50.05%. Chemical results also show that Basalt is richer in iron 12.71% versus 0.44% for Limestone. Finally, they revealed a fire loss of 40.91% for Limestone and 2.44% for Basalt. Second, physical analysis results show that Diack Basalt has the best characteristics with a flattening coefficient of 5% between 5% and 20%; the percentage of pollutants is 0.36% less than 1%; the Los Angeles coefficient is 12.21% below 15, while Bandia Limestone gives a flattening coefficient of 3%; the Los Angeles coefficient of 40.17% and the percentage of pollutant (2.4%) well above 2%. It is noted that the percentage of Limestone pollutant is too high. These important results show the net advantage of Basalt compared to Limestone in terms of physical-chemical characteristics.
对铁路工程用玄武岩与班迪亚灰岩理化特性对比研究的贡献
本文对来自塞内加尔采石场的石灰石和玄武岩的物理化学特性进行了比较研究。首先,化学测试表明玄武岩的二氧化硅含量为51.59%,而石灰石的二氧化硅含量则为2.84%。玄武岩由二氧化硅矿物和基本上碳酸化的矿物组成,CaO百分比为50.05%。化学结果还表明,玄武岩富含12.71%的铁,而石灰石的铁含量为0.44%。最后,他们揭示了石灰岩和玄武岩的火灾损失分别为40.91%和2.44%。第二,物理分析结果表明,底质玄武岩具有最好的特性,其压扁系数在5%-20%之间,为5%;污染物的百分比为0.36%,小于1%;洛杉矶系数在15以下为12.21%,而班迪亚石灰岩的压扁系数为3%;洛杉矶系数为40.17%,污染物百分比(2.4%)远高于2%。值得注意的是,石灰石污染物的百分比过高。这些重要结果表明,与石灰石相比,玄武岩在物理化学特性方面具有净优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信