4.7 Review

Geopolymer concrete durability subjected to aggressive environments - A review of influence factors and comparison with ordinary Portland cement

期刊

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
卷 279, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122496

关键词

Geopolymer; Ordinary Portland cement; Durability; Damage mechanism; Influencing factors

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51678533]
  2. Zhejiang Province Basic Public Welfare Research Project [LGG21E080012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Geopolymer concrete, as a potential substitute for ordinary Portland cement (OPC), has shown better durability in aggressive environments compared to OPC concrete. Factors influencing durability and interactions in geopolymer concrete have been highlighted, along with suggestions for future studies on durability during life-cycle periods.
Although ordinary Portland cement (OPC) is the main raw material of concrete, its production pollutes the atmosphere and wastes a large amount of energy, which does not meet the demands of the green building industry development. Geopolymers have received considerable attention and expected to become a substitute for OPC. However, the geopolymer concrete has limited literature of durability subjected to aggressive environments, and which is the basis for the prediction of long-term performance and broader engineering applications. This paper reviews the recent researches on geopolymer concrete exposed to carbonation, acid corrosion, sulfate solution, heat temperature, and chloride penetration comparison with OPC concrete. In many cases, the durability of geopolymer concrete is better than OPC concrete, and calcium content has a great effect on the durability mechanism. The influence factors and interactions of durability of geopolymer concrete have been highlight. Finally, a few potential opportunities and noteworthy challenges have been suggested for future studies on durability during life-cycle periods. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据