ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Investigating the Rheology and Strength of Self-compacting Geopolymer Concrete Using Blast Furnace Slag and Flyash
1
School of Civil Engineering, Lovely Professional University
Jalandhar-G.T. Road(NH-1), Phagwara, India
2
Civil Engineering, NITTTR, India
These authors had equal contribution to this work
Submission date: 2024-10-19
Final revision date: 2025-05-21
Acceptance date: 2025-06-04
Online publication date: 2025-11-20
Publication date: 2025-11-20
Corresponding author
Geeta Mehta
School of Civil Engineering, Lovely Professional University Jalandhar-G.T. Road(NH-1), Phagwara, Hoshiarpur, India
School of Civil Engineering, Lovely Professional University Jalandhar-G.T. Road(NH-1), Phagwara, Hoshiarpur, India
Civil and Environmental Engineering Reports 2025;35(4):150-163
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Building energy requirements have risen drastically in the modern era, partly because of expanding populations and broadened human lifestyles. Greater energy demand, depletion of fossil resources, and environmental concerns constitute crucial motivating factors in building enticing and sustainable infrastructure. In the current situation, environmental management is an urgent problem that has to be highlighted. This article covers an experimental study that evaluates the use of industrial waste as a substitute for cement in self-compacting geopolymer concrete. To serve as a binder in geopolymer concrete with the further advantage of self-compaction, industrial residues such as blast furnace slag from the metals sector and flyash from thermal plants are researched for their fresh and hardened characteristics tapping into geo-polymerization. An alkaline solution can be generated by maintaining a 2.5 ratio of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide at 12M NaOH. Eleven mixes together with varied proportions of granulated ground blast furnace slag and flyash have been assessed for workability, strength with durability. The results of experimental work indicate that the development of self-compacting geopolymer concrete using a binder made exclusively of granulated ground BFS an industrial waste 12G100F0 is an effective combination that provides sufficient workability, strength, and durability.
REFERENCES (50)
1.
Deng, Li et al. 2019. Assessing the life cycle CO2 emissions of reinforced concrete structures: Four cases from China. Journal of cleaner production, 210, pp.1496-1506.
2.
Shi, C et al. 2011. New cements for the 21st century: The pursuit of an alternative to Portland cement. Cement and concrete research, 41(7), pp.750-763.
3.
Zhang, J et al. 2014. Analysis of CO2 emission for the cement manufacturing with alternative raw materials: a LCA-based framework. Energy Procedia, 61, pp.2541-2545.
4.
Akbar, A et al. 2021. Sugarcane bagasse ash-based engineered geopolymer mortar incorporating propylene fibers. Journal of Building Engineering, 33, p.101492.
5.
Valderrama, C et al. 2012. Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-cycle assessment study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 25, pp.60-67.
6.
Ramineni, K et al. 2018, April. Performance studies on self-compacting geopolymer concrete at ambient curing condition. In International Congress on Polymers in Concrete (pp. 501-508). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
7.
Embong, R et al. Strength and microstructural properties of fly ash based geopolymer concrete containing high-calcium and water-absorptive aggregate, Journal of cleaner production , vol. 112, pp. 816–822, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.06.058.
8.
Chaturvedy, GK et al. 2024. Incorporating multi-walled carbon nanotubes in rubberized concrete: impact on physical, mechanical, and fire resistance properties. Fullerenes, Nanotubes and Carbon Nanostructures, 32(12), 1121–1134. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1536383X.2024.2375597.
9.
Kansotiya M Journal of cleaner production 2024. Influence of nano silica and crumb rubber on the physical and durability characteristics of concrete. Multiscale and Multidiscip. Model. Exp. and Des. 7, 2877–2892.
10.
Rais, MS et al. An experimental and analytical investigation into age-dependent strength of fly ash mortar at elevated temperature, Construction and Building Material, vol. 222, pp. 300–311, Oct. 2019.
11.
Okoye, FN 2017. Geopolymer binder: A veritable alternative to Portland cement. Materials Today: Proceedings, 4(4), pp.5599-5604.
12.
Castel, A et al. 2010. Bond and cracking properties of self-consolidating concrete, Constr Build Mater, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1222–1231.
13.
Chaturvedy, GK et al. 2023. Analyzing the behavior of graphene oxide on high-strength rubberized concrete properties using different optimization techniques, Diamond and Related Materials, Volume 140, 110485.
14.
Rożek, P et al. 2019. Geopolymer-zeolite composites: A review, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 230, pp. 557–579.
15.
Fernández-Jiménez, A et al. 2005. Microstructure development of alkali-activated fly ash cement: a descriptive model. Cement and concrete research, 35(6), pp.1204-1209.
16.
Palomo, A et al. 1999. Alkali-activated fly ashes: A cement for the future. Cement and concrete research, 29(8), pp.1323-1329.
17.
Kovalchuk, G et al. 2007. Alkali-activated fly ash: Effect of thermal curing conditions on mechanical and microstructural development–Part II. Fuel, 86(3), pp.315-322.
18.
Turner, LK and Collins, FG 2013. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: A comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Construction and building materials, 43, pp.125-130.
19.
Saini, R et al. 2024. Examining the effects of nano iron oxide on physical and mechanical characteristics of rubberized concrete. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 9(6), p.180.
20.
Jagadesh, P et al. 2022. Effect of nano titanium di oxide on mechanical properties of fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag based geopolymer concrete. Journal of building engineering, 61, p.105235.
21.
Amran, M et al. 2021. Fly ash-based eco-friendly geopolymer concrete: A critical review of the long-term durability properties. Construction and Building Materials, 270, p.121857.
22.
Yedukondalu, C and Sashidhar, C 2019. Mechanical Properties Of Self Compacting Geopolymer Concrete At Elevated Temperature. Int. J. Tech. Innov. Mod. Eng. Sci., 5.
23.
Corinaldesi, V et al. 2010. Characterization of marble powder for its use in mortar and concrete. Construction and building materials, 24(1), pp.113-117.
24.
Uygunoğlu, T et al. 2014. Use of waste marble and recycled aggregates in self-compacting concrete for environmental sustainability. Journal of cleaner production, 84, pp.691-700.
25.
Ergün, A 2011. Effects of the usage of diatomite and waste marble powder as partial replacement of cement on the mechanical properties of concrete. Construction and building materials, 25(2), pp.806-812.
26.
Kuoribo, E and Mahmoud, H 2022. Utilisation of waste marble dust in concrete production: A scientometric review and future research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 374, p.133872.
27.
Kou, SC and Poon, CS 2009. Properties of concrete prepared with crushed fine stone, furnace bottom ash and fine recycled aggregate as fine aggregates. Construction and Building Materials, 23(8), pp.2877-2886.
28.
Dobiszewska, M et al. 2023. Utilization of rock dust as cement replacement in cement composites: An alternative approach to sustainable mortar and concrete productions. Journal of Building Engineering, 69, p.106180.
29.
“Specification and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete,” 2002, Accessed: Oct. 14, 2024. [Online]. Available: www.efnarc.org.
30.
Donza, H et al. 2002. High-strength concrete with different fine aggregate. Cement and Concrete research, 32(11), pp.1755-1761.
31.
Reed, M et al. 2014. Fibre-reinforced geopolymer concrete with ambient curing for in situ applications. Journal of materials science, 49(12), pp.4297-4304.
32.
Yuksel, I 2018. Blast-furnace slag. In Waste and supplementary cementitious materials in concrete (pp. 361-415). Woodhead Publishing.
33.
Li, G and Zhao, X 2003. Properties of concrete incorporating fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag. Cement and concrete composites, 25(3), pp.293-299.
34.
Özbay, E et al. 2016. Utilization and efficiency of ground granulated blast furnace slag on concrete properties–A review. Construction and Building Materials, 105, pp.423-434.
35.
Bellmann, F and Stark, J 2009. Activation of blast furnace slag by a new method. Cement and Concrete Research, 39(8), pp.644-650.
36.
Monosi, S et al. 2016. Electric arc furnace slag as natural aggregate replacement in concrete production. Cement and concrete composites, 66, pp.66-72.
37.
Chindaprasirt, P et al. 2018. Effect of calcium-rich compounds on setting time and strength development of alkali-activated fly ash cured at ambient temperature. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 9, p.e00198.
38.
Youssef, P et al. 2024. Characterization of geopolymer composites for 3D printing: a microstructure approach. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 9(5), p.157.
39.
Rajan, HS and Kathirvel, P 2021. Sustainable development of geopolymer binder using sodium silicate synthesized from agricultural waste. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286, p.124959.
40.
Asif, A et al. 2015, January. The effect of Si/Al ratio and sodium silicate on the mechanical properties of fly ash based geopolymer for coating. In Materials Science Forum (Vol. 803, pp. 355-361). Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
41.
Phoo-Ngernkham, T et al. 2017. Effect of sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate solutions on strengths of alkali activated high calcium fly ash containing Portland cement. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 21(6), pp.2202-2210.
42.
Luke, O and Allistair, W and Bryan, M 2018. Preliminary Mix Design Procedure for Alkali Activated Cement Mortars Based on Metakaolin and Industrial Waste Products Activated With Potasium Silicate Proceeding of the 42nd International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites.
43.
Ahmed, H U et al. 2021. Compressive strength of sustainable geopolymer concrete composites: a state-of-the-art review. Sustainability, 13(24), p.13502.
44.
Phoo-ngernkham, T et al. 2015. Effects of sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate solutions on compressive and shear bond strengths of FA–GBFS geopolymer. Construction and Building Materials, 91, pp.1-8.
45.
Ebid, AM et al. 2023. Heat and mass transfer in different concrete structures: a study of self-compacting concrete and geopolymer concrete. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 18, pp.404-411.
46.
Bereau of Indian Standards, “IS 516 (1959): Method of Tests for Strength of Concrete”.
47.
EFNARC-2005 “Specification and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete.” 2005. www.efnarc.org.Part 8, Depth of penetration of water under pressure,” p. 7, 2009.
48.
BS EN 12390-8 [21] (DIN 1048 [22]).” Accessed: Oct. 16, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.scribd.com/documen....
49.
Jindal, BB et al. 2020. Effects of ultra fine slag as mineral admixture on the compressive strength, water absorption and permeability of rice husk ash based geopolymer concrete. Materials Today: Proceedings, 32, pp.871-877.
50.
Zhao, K and Wang, Y 2022. Improvements on the use of GPC to measure large-size microstructures in aged asphalt binders. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 23(7), pp.2309-2319.
| eISSN: | 2450-8594 |
| ISSN: | 2080-5187 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
