Vol. 1 (2025)
Inaugural Issue 2025

Articles

Synthesis of Concrete Waste Powder in Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Mortar: Assessing Strength, Durability Properties and Environmental Impact

Published 2025-10-31

  • Pankaj Saini
    • ,
  • Paramveer Singh
    • ,
  • Tejinderpal Singh
    • ,
  • Kanish Kapoor
    • ,
  • S.P. Singh

Pankaj Saini
Department of Civil Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

Paramveer Singh
Department of Civil Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

Tejinderpal Singh
Department of Civil Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

Kanish Kapoor
Department of Civil Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

S.P. Singh
Department of Civil Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

Abstract

The sustainable reuse of concrete waste in the form of aggregates and finely milled Concrete Water Powder (CWP) in Geopolymer Mortar (GPM) is an emerging area of research. This study examines the influence of CWP and Silica Fume (SF) on the strength, durability, and sustainability of Fly Ash (FA)-based GPM. This way, the potential for coupled valorisation fly ash and demolition wastes was assessed, thus promoting circularity in construction sector. GPM was substituted with CWP at 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%, while SF substitution was maintained at 10% in all mixes except the control. Workability decreased with increasing CWP content, whereas compressive strength peaked at 20% CWP substitution. This mix also demonstrated superior durability, attributed to a densified microstructure and enhanced calcium hydroxide formation, as evidenced by SEM analysis. Environmental and economic assessments indicated that the 20% CWP–10% SF mix achieved the highest Sustainability Index (SI) and Economic Index (EI), supporting its viability. These findings highlight the potential of CWP as a precursor in sustainable GPM production.

Keywords

Geopolymer mortar, Concrete waste powder, Circular economy, Waste valorisation, Low-Carbon binder

PDF

References

  1. Andrew RM. Global CO2 emissions from cement production. Earth Syst Sci Data 2018; 10: 195-217. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-195-2018
  2. Lim C, Jung E, Lee S, et al. Global Trend of Cement Production and Utilization of Circular Resources. Journal of Energy Engineering 2020; 29: 57-63.
  3. Nanavati SC, Lulla SJ, Singh AR, et al. A Review on Fly Ash based Geopolymer Concrete. A Review on Fly Ash based Geopolymer Concrete. 2017.
  4. Davidovits J. Geopolymer Chemistry and Applications. 5-th edition. 2020.
  5. Davidovits J. Geopolymer Cement. 2013.
  6. Zhang J, Shi C, Zhang Z, et al. Durability of alkali-activated materials in aggressive environments : A review on recent studies. Constr Build Mater 2017; 152: 598-613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.027
  7. Ding Y, Dai J, Shi C. Mechanical properties of alkali-activated concrete : A state-of-the-art review. Constr Build Mater 2016; 127: 68-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.121
  8. M. Fareed Ahmed, M. Fadhil Nuruddin and NS. 5. Ahmed et al. International Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering 2011; 5: 7.
  9. Shaikh FUA. Mechanical and durability properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete containing recycled coarse aggregates. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2016; 5: 277-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.05.009
  10. Duxson P, Provis JL, Lukey GC, et al. The role of inorganic polymer technology in the development of “green concrete.” Cem Concr Res 2007; 37: 1590-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.08.018
  11. Karthik A, Sudalaimani K, Vijaya Kumar CT. Investigation on mechanical properties of fly ash-ground granulated blast furnace slag based self curing bio-geopolymer concrete. Constr Build Mater 2017; 149: 338-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.05.139
  12. Rao A, Jha KN, Misra S. Use of aggregates from recycled construction and demolition waste in concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 2007; 50: 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.05.010
  13. Das S, Singh P, Negi VS. Strength and durability properties of polypropylene fiber reinforced, recycled coarse aggregate concrete. Indian Concrete Journal 2018; 92: 62-9.
  14. Behera M, Bhattacharyya SK, Minocha AK, et al. Recycled aggregate from C&D waste & its use in concrete - A breakthrough towards sustainability in construction sector: A review. Constr Build Mater 2014; 68: 501-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.003
  15. Papamichael I, Voukkali I, Loizia P, et al. Construction and demolition waste framework of circular economy: A mini review. Waste Management and Research 2023; 41: 1728-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231190804
  16. Ahmari S, Ren X, Toufigh V, et al. Production of geopolymeric binder from blended waste concrete powder and fly ash. Constr Build Mater 2012; 35: 718-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.044
  17. D.L. Mayta-Ponce PS-C and FAH-M. Thermomechanical evaluation of new geopolymer binder from demolition waste and ignimbrite slits for application in the construction industry 2019. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201930301005
  18. Kapoor K, Singh SP, Singh B. Durability of self-compacting concrete made with Recycled Concrete Aggregates and mineral admixtures. Constr Build Mater 2016; 128: 67-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.10.026
  19. Pereira-De-Oliveira LA, Nepomuceno MCS, Castro-Gomes JP, et al. Permeability properties of self-Compacting concrete with coarse recycled aggregates. Constr Build Mater 2014; 51: 113-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.10.061
  20. Elansary AA, Ashmawy MM, Abdalla HA. Effect of recycled coarse aggregate on physical and mechanical properties of concrete. Advances in Structural Engineering 2021; 24: 583-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433220963792
  21. Xia DT, Xie SJ, Fu M, et al. Effects of maximum particle size of coarse aggregates and steel fiber contents on the mechanical properties and impact resistance of recycled aggregate concrete. Advances in Structural Engineering 2021; 24: 3085-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/13694332211017998
  22. Guide to the use of recycled concrete and masonry materials 2002.
  23. Thomas JJ, Jennings HM, Chen JJ. Influence of nucleation seeding on the hydration mechanisms of tricalcium silicate and cement. Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2009; 113: 4327-34. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp809811w
  24. Bordy A, Younsi A, Aggoun S, et al. Cement substitution by a recycled cement paste fine: Role of the residual anhydrous clinker. Constr Build Mater 2017; 132: 1-8.
  25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.080
  26. Sharma A, Singh P, Kapoor K. Utilization of recycled fine powder as an activator in fly ash based geopolymer mortar. Constr Build Mater 2022; 323: 126581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.126581
  27. Yip CK, Lukey GC, Van Deventer JSJ. The coexistence of geopolymeric gel and calcium silicate hydrate at the early stage of alkaline activation. Cem Concr Res 2005; 35: 1688-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.10.042
  28. Hilbig ABÆH, Kaps ÆC. Alkali-activated metakaolin-slag blends — performance and structure in dependence of their composition 2007: 3024-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-0525-6
  29. Sun Z, Asce M, Liu F, et al. Hydration of Concrete Containing Hybrid Recycled Demolition Powders 2017. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001842
  30. Ren P, Li B, Yu J-G, et al. Utilization of recycled concrete fines and powders to produce alkali-activated slag concrete blocks. J Clean Prod 2020; 267: 122115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122115
  31. Khater HM. Effect of silica fume on the characterization of the geopolymer materials. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering 2013; 5: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2008-6695-5-12
  32. Memon FA, Nuruddin MF, Shafiq N. Effect of silica fume on the fresh and hardened properties of fly ash-based self-compacting geopolymer concrete. International Journal of Minerals, Metallurgy and Materials 2013; 20: 205-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12613-013-0714-7
  33. Oyebisi S, Olutoge F, Kathirvel P, et al. Sustainability assessment of geopolymer concrete synthesized by slag and corncob ash. Case Studies in Construction Materials 2022; 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01665
  34. Alhawat M, Yildirim G, Ashour A, et al. A study on the influencing parameters in developing construction and demolition waste-based geopolymer concretes and their sustainability assessment. Constr Build Mater 2024; 426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.136143
  35. Jagadesh P, Oyebisi S, Hareesh Muthu A, et al. Recycled concrete powder on cement mortar: Physico-mechanical effects and lifecycle assessments. Journal of Building Engineering 2024; 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.108507
  36. Oyebisi S, Alomayri T. Cement-based concrete modified with Vitellaria Paradoxa ash: A lifecycle assessment. Constr Build Mater 2022; 342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127906
  37. IS: 3812 (Part-1). Pulverized fuel ash — specification. Part 1: For use as Pozzolana in cement, Cement Mortar and Concrete (Second Revision). Bureau of Indian Standards 2003: 1-14.
  38. ASTM. C1240 Standard Specification for Silica Fume Used in Cementitious Mixtures. Annual Book of ASTM Standards 2020: 1-7.
  39. IS: 383-2016. Indian Standard Coarse and Fine aggregate for Concrete- Specification. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India 2016: 1-21.
  40. IS 5512-1983 Reaffirmed 2004. Specification for flow table for use in tests of hydraulic cements and pozzolanic materials. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi 1983; Reaffirmed.
  41. of Indian Standards B, IS: 4031(Part 7), Bureau of Indian Standards, et al. Determination of Compressive Strength of Masonry Cement. Bureau of Indian Standards,New Dehli 1988; 1980: New Delhi, India.
  42. IS-4031-PART-6-1988-2.pdf n.d.
  43. ASTM C109/C109M-02. Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars. Annual Book of ASTM Standards 2020; 04: 9.
  44. ASTM C642-13. Standard Test Method for Density, Absorption and Voids in Hardened Concrete. ASTM International 2013.
  45. ASTM C 267. Standard Test Methods for Chemical Resistance of Mortars, Grouts , and Monolithic. Current 1998; 04: 1-6.
  46. Hong T, Ji C, Park H. Integrated model for assessing the cost and CO2 emission (IMACC) for sustainable structural design in ready-mix concrete. J Environ Manage 2012; 103: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.034
  47. Neupane K. Evaluation of environmental sustainability of one-part geopolymer binder concrete. Cleaner Materials 2022; 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clema.2022.100138
  48. H^ A, Hemalatha T, Arunachalam N, et al. Assessment of Embodied Energy in the Production of Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC). vol. 2. 2014.
  49. Waqar A, Khan MB, Afzal MT, et al. Investigating the synergistic effects of carbon fiber and silica fume on concrete strength and eco-efficiency. Case Studies in Construction Materials 2024; 20.
  50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e02967
  51. Thilakarathna PSM, Seo S, Baduge KSK, et al. Embodied carbon analysis and benchmarking emissions of high and ultra-high strength concrete using machine learning algorithms. J Clean Prod 2020; 262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121281
  52. Jamieson E, McLellan B, Van Riessen A, et al. Comparison of embodied energies of Ordinary Portland Cement with Bayer-derived geopolymer products. J Clean Prod 2015; 99: 112-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.008
  53. Eltantawi I, Sheikh MN, Hadi MNS. Design of a novel ternary blended Self-Compacting Ultra-high-performance Geopolymer Concrete. Constr Build Mater 2024; 451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.138819
  54. K K, P.S A, V P, et al. Computation of embodied energy and carbon dioxide emissions of geopolymer concrete in high-rise buildings: a case study in Chennai city. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 2024; 28: 1517-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2023.2260865
  55. Benaicha M, Hafidi Alaoui A, Jalbaud O, et al. Dosage effect of superplasticizer on self-compacting concrete: Correlation between rheology and strength. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 2019; 8: 2063-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.01.015
  56. Singh T, Kapoor K, Singh SP. Behavioural insights on compressive strength and fresh properties of self-compacting geopolymer concrete: Integrating a Taguchi-GRA-BWM approach for mix optimization. Constr Build Mater 2025; 472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.140654
  57. IS 4031- Part V. Methods of physical tests for hydraulic cement. Part V- Determination of initial and final setting times. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi 1988: Reaffirmed in 2005.
  58. Saha S, Rajasekaran C. Enhancement of the properties of fly ash based geopolymer paste by incorporating ground granulated blast furnace slag. Constr Build Mater 2017; 146: 615-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.139
  59. Nikvar-hassani A, Manjarrez L, Zhang L, et al. Rheology, Setting Time, and Compressive Strength of Class F Fly Ash - Based Geopolymer Binder Containing Ordinary Portland Cement 2022; 34: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0004008
  60. Khater HM. Effect of silica fume on the characterization of the geopolymer materials. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering 2013; 5: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2008-6695-5-12
  61. Jena S, Panigrahi R, Sahu P. Effect of silica fume on the properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete. vol. 25. Springer Singapore; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3317-0_13
  62. Yang ZX, Ha NR, Jang MS, et al. Geopolymer concrete fabricated by waste concrete sludge with silica fume. Materials Science Forum 2009; 620 622: 791-4. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.620-622.791
  63. Sujatha T. Strength Assessment of Heat Cured Geopolymer crvIhoefcf 2012; 13: 635-46.
  64. Nath P, Sarker PK. Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and early strength properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in ambient condition. Constr Build Mater 2014; 66: 163-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.05.080
  65. Dutta D, Thokchom S, Ghosh P, et al. Effect of silica fume additions on porosity of fly ash geopolymers. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2010; 5: 74-9.
  66. Suresh T, Partha G, Somnath G. Acid Resistance of Fly ash based Geopolymer mortars. International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering 2009; 1: 36-40.
  67. Sata V, Sathonsaowaphak A, Chindaprasirt P. Resistance of lignite bottom ash geopolymer mortar to sulfate and sulfuric acid attack. Cem Concr Compos 2012; 34: 700-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.01.010