Cited by 2Concrete and Cement Materials ResearchMicrobial Applications in Construction MaterialsInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials

Mix Design of Ambient Cured Geopolymer Concrete with Fly Ash, GGBFS, and Borax

Open access
Hanani, Eklisia, Satyarno, Iman, Sulistyo, Djoko·2024·INERSIA lnformasi dan Ekspose Hasil Riset Teknik Sipil dan Arsitektur

Abstract

Geopolymer cement, using fly ash (FA), presents a viable alternative to Portland cement. However, FA-based geopolymers often lack reactivity and strength, necessitating combination with calcium-rich materials like ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS). However, GGBFS could accelerate setting and decrease workability, requiring a retarder. Borax is recognized for its retarding properties in FA-based geopolymers, but its impact in FA-GGBFS systems remains understudied. This study evaluated the influence of varying proportions of FA and GGBFS with the addition of borax, on the setting time, workability, and mechanical strength of the geopolymer paste, mortar, and concrete under ambient curing conditions. Setting time test was conducted for the geopolymer paste, flow table test for workability assessment of mortar, and compressive strength testing at 1, 7, and 28 days for the mechanical strength of paste and concrete. Various FA:GGBFS ratios (100:0, 70:30, 50:50, and 0:100) were examined. Alkali activator consists of NaOH and Na2SO3 with Na2SO3/NaOH ratio (R) of 1.5 and alkali to precursors ratio (A) of 0.45 was used. Borax was added at a constant 3% by weight of the precursors. Both the volume ratios of paste to fine aggregate voids (Rm) and mortar to coarse aggregate voids (Rb) were set to 1.5. Borax increased initial setting time by 7-33 minutes for FA-GGBFS geopolymer. GGBFS replacement decreased the workability of mortar, with flow index ranging from 83-158%. Increasing GGBFS content significantly improved compressive strength in both paste and concrete samples. Notably, 100% GGBFS replacement yielded the highest concrete strength at 74.86 MPa after 28 days. However, the optimal balance of properties was achieved with a 50% GGBFS replacement, resulting in satisfactory strengths of 100.29 MPa for paste and 69.08 MPa for concrete, along with a 40-minute initial setting time and a flow index of 138%. These findings surpass prior studies on similar geopolymers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21831/inersia.v20i2.74464

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanani, E., Satyarno, I., & Sulistyo, D.
Affiliations
Universitas Gadjah Mada (ID)
Venue
INERSIA lnformasi dan Ekspose Hasil Riset Teknik Sipil dan Arsitektur
Published
2024-12-31
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
265-276
ISSN
  • 0216-762X (ISSN-L)
  • 2528-388X
OpenAlex
W4409834456
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
0.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
INERSIA lnformasi dan Ekspose Hasil Riset Teknik Sipil dan Arsitektur (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Concrete and Cement Materials Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Microbial Applications in Construction Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Keywords
geopolymer concrete, fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag, borax, setting time, workability, compressive strength, concrete mix design, alkaline activator, ambient curing, cement replacement, flow index, geopolymer paste, geopolymer mortar

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review