4.7 Article

Sodium carbonate activated slag as cement replacement in autoclaved aerated concrete

Journal

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
Volume 43, Issue 8, Pages 6039-6047

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.01.144

Keywords

Autoclaved aerated concrete; Sodium carbonate activated slag; Reaction product; Microstructure; Compressive strength; Environmental impact

Funding

  1. Research Program of the Materials Innovation Institute M2i [M81.6.12478]
  2. Rijkswaterstaat Grote Projecten en Onderhoud
  3. Graniet-Import Benelux
  4. Kijlstra Betonmortel
  5. Struyk Verwo
  6. Attero
  7. Rijkswaterstaat Zee en Delta District Noord
  8. Van Gansewinkel Minerals
  9. BTE
  10. V.d. Bosch Beton
  11. Selor
  12. GMB
  13. Icopal
  14. BN International
  15. Eltomation
  16. Knauf Gips
  17. Kronos
  18. Joma
  19. CRH Europe Sustainable Concrete Centre
  20. Cement BetonCentrum
  21. Heros
  22. Inashco
  23. Keim
  24. Sirius International
  25. Boskalis
  26. NNERGY

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper aims to study the suitability of fully replacing cement by sodium carbonate activated slag in producing autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC). The material properties of the product are characterized in terms of green strength development, mechanical properties, pore related properties such as porosity and thermal conductivity, shrinkage and reaction products. The produced alkali-activated slag-based AAC (ASAAC) shows comparable material properties to the designed cement-based reference AAC samples by giving a compressive strength of -25% with raw density of +18%, thermal conductivity of +13% with a porosity of -5% and drying shrinkage of +5.5%. Besides, a relatively higher crystallinity of calcium silicate hydrates and Al incorporation in the chain of C-S-H is observed for ASAAC products. Furthermore, significant reductions in cost, energy consumption and CO2 emission are foreseen.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available