Advertisement

Evaluation of Structural Performance of Concrete with Ambient-Cured Alkali-Activated Binders

  • Kruthi Kiran RamagiriEmail author
  • Darshan Chauhan
  • Shashank Gupta
  • Arkamitra Kar
  • Dibyendu Adak
Conference paper
  • 180 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 46)

Abstract

Enormous global CO2 emissions associated with cement production necessitates the use of sustainable cementitious alternatives. Alkali-activated binder (AAB) which utilizes industrial wastes as precursors is a promising substitute for cement. To promote the practical use of AAB concrete, this paper presents an investigation on the mechanical and microstructural properties of ambient-cured AAB concrete. Fly ash/slag ratio is varied and the optimum mix is proposed based on compressive strength test results. Pull-out test is performed to evaluate the bond strength of ambient-cured reinforced AAB concrete. The specimen-level tests are supplemented with results from X-ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) along with energy-dispersive spectroscopic (EDS) analysis of the AAB paste samples. This is done to corroborate the microstructural characteristics with the mechanical properties at specimen-level. Fly ash: slag ratio of 70:30 is recommended as the optimum proportion considering both strength and economical aspects. Incorporation of slag results in the formation of the additional reaction products, refining the pore structure and enhancing strength. The AAB mix with fly ash: slag ratio of 50:50 exhibits the highest compressive strength and bond strength.

Keywords

Alkali-activated concrete AAB Ambient-cured Bond strength Microstructure 

References

  1. 1.
    Stafford FN, Raupp-Pereira F, Labrincha JA, Hotza D (2016) Life cycle assessment of the production of cement: a Brazilian case study. J Cleaner Prod 137:1293–1299Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Turner LK, Collins FG (2013) Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: a comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Constr Build Mater 43:125–130Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ke X, Bernal SA, Provis JL (2017) Uptake of chloride and carbonate by Mg-Al and Ca-Al layered double hydroxides in simulated pore solutions of alkali-activated slag cement. Cem Concr Res 100:1–3Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gebregziabiher BS, Thomas R, Peethamparan S (2015) Very early-age reaction kinetics and microstructural development in alkali-activated slag. Cem Concr Compo 55:91–102Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fernández-Jiménez A, García-Lodeiro I, Palomo A (2007) Durability of alkali-activated fly ash cementitious materials. J Mater Sci 42(9):3055–3065Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    García-Lodeiro I, Palomo A, Fernández-Jiménez A (2007) Alkali-aggregate reaction in activated fly ash systems. Cem Concr Res 37(2):175–183Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fernandez-Jimenez AM, Palomo A, Lopez-Hombrados C (2006) Engineering properties of alkali-activated fly ash concrete. ACI Mater J 103(2):106–112Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sarker PK (2011) Bond strength of reinforcing steel embedded in fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Mater Struct 44(5):1021–1030Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yang KH, Song JK (2012) Empirical equations for mechanical properties of Ca(OH)2-based alkali-activated slag concrete. ACI Mater J 109(4):431–440Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Castel A, Foster SJ (2015) Bond strength between blended slag and Class F fly ash geopolymer concrete with steel reinforcement. Cem Concr Res 72:48–53Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Adak D, Sarkar M, Mandal S (2017) Structural performance of nano-silica modified fly-ash based geopolymer concrete. Constr Build Mater 135:430–439Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ASTM (2011) Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. ASTM C39/C39M11, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Indian Standards (1967) Methods of testing bond in reinforced concrete, Part 1: Pull-out test. IS 2770-1, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Criado M, Aperador W, Sobrados I (2016) Microstructural and mechanical properties of alkali activated Colombian raw materials. Materials 9(3):158(Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI))Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ma Y (2013) Microstructure and engineering properties of alkali activated fly ash-as an environment friendly alternative to Portland cement. Ph.D. dissertation, TU Delft, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Walkley B, Rees GJ, San Nicolas R, van Deventer JS, Hanna JV, Provis JL (2018) New structural model of hydrous sodium aluminosilicate gels and the role of charge-balancing extra-framework Al. J Phys Chem C 122(10):5673–5685Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bakharev T (2005) Geopolymeric materials prepared using Class F fly ash and elevated temperature curing. Cem Concr Res 35(6):1224–1232Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kar A, Halabe UB, Ray I, Unnikrishnan A (2013) Nondestructive characterizations of alkali activated fly ash and/or slag concrete. Eur Sci J ESJ 9(24). http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2013.v9n24p%25p

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kruthi Kiran Ramagiri
    • 1
    Email author
  • Darshan Chauhan
    • 2
  • Shashank Gupta
    • 3
  • Arkamitra Kar
    • 1
  • Dibyendu Adak
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringBITS-Pilani Hyderabad CampusHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  3. 3.Civil, Environmental and Land Management EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly
  4. 4.Civil EngineeringNIT MeghalayaShillongIndia

Personalised recommendations