4.4 Article

Performance evaluation of sustainable geopolymer concrete produced from ferrochrome slag and silica fume

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/19648189.2021.1886179

Keywords

Geopolymer; compressive strength; ferrochrome slag; scanning electron microscope; X-ray diffraction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The main focus of this study is to utilize industrial by-products ferrochrome slag and silica fume as partial replacements in Geopolymer concrete to improve mechanical properties. The combination of varying percentages of ferrochrome slag and silica fume led to significant increases in compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and flexural strength.
The main intention of this research is to reuse the industrial by product ferrochrome slag and silica fume as a partial replacement of natural coarse aggregate and fly ash, respectively for the production of Geopolymer concrete with improved mechanical properties. Natural coarse aggregate was replaced by ferrochrome slag (FS) in varying percentages from 0 to 40% by weight. Fly ash was replaced by silica fume (SF) at different percentages 0 to 15% by weight. The combined effect of FS and SF was studied by developing Geopolymer concrete. Tests for compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and flexural strength of the GPC have been carried out at 7, 28 and 90 days of curing. The scanning electron microscope (SEM) was performed for the inspection of surface texture of the microstructure of the hardened samples. X-ray diffraction (XRD) was conducted to investigate the crystallinity of the mineral phases of the material as well as the activation product. Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) was carried out to know the degree of polymerization of the samples. At 28 days, compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and flexural strength of GPC produced by replacing 30% FS and 10% SF increases by 38.9%, 47% and 20.4% respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available