Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Method of Formulating 3D-Printable Strain-Hardening Geopolymer Composites for Additive Construction

Version 1 : Received: 24 March 2022 / Approved: 25 March 2022 / Online: 25 March 2022 (03:25:40 CET)

How to cite: Bong, S.H.; Nematollahi, B.; Naidu Nerella, V.; Mechtcherine, V. Method of Formulating 3D-Printable Strain-Hardening Geopolymer Composites for Additive Construction. Preprints 2022, 2022030335. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202203.0335.v1 Bong, S.H.; Nematollahi, B.; Naidu Nerella, V.; Mechtcherine, V. Method of Formulating 3D-Printable Strain-Hardening Geopolymer Composites for Additive Construction. Preprints 2022, 2022030335. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202203.0335.v1

Abstract

One of the major limitations of the current 3D-concrete-printing technology is incorporation of reinforcement. Furthermore, there is a need to decrease the ecological footprint of printable concrete. As a possible solution for these challenges, this paper presents a 3D-printable strain-hardening geopolymer composite (3DP-SHGC) that shows pseudo-ductile behaviour under direct tension. The developed 3DP-SHGC is composed of one-part (just-add-water) geopolymer binder made of slag (GGBFS), fly ash (FA) and solid activator. The one-part geopolymer binder eliminates the need for elevated temperature curing and handling of corrosive alkaline liquids. At first, an optimum matrix was identified by studying the effects of FA to GGBFS ratio on the rheological properties and compressive strength. Subsequently the optimum matrix was reinforced by PVA fibres to make the 3DP-SHGC, which printing performance and rheological properties were evaluated. In addition, the influences of curing temperature on the compressive, flexural and tensile performances of the printed specimens were also investigated. The results were compared with those obtained for the mould-cast specimens. The 3DP-SHGC exhibited superior flexural performance, higher tensile strength, and comparable tensile strain capacity to the mould-cast counterpart. Further, the curing temperature had influence on the mechanical properties of both 3D-printed and mould-cast SHGCs. The underlying reasons for the differences are discussed.

Keywords

3D-concrete-printing; strain-hardening geopolymer composite, rheological properties; mechanical properties; strain-hardening

Subject

Engineering, Civil Engineering

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.