بررسی خواص ژئوپلیمرها برای استفاده به‌عنوان مصالح پایدار

نوع مقاله : تالیفی

نویسنده

دانشگاه تهران ، گروه مهندسی محیط زیست

چکیده

برای توسعه بیشتر مواد سازگار با محیط ‌زیست، شناخت محرک‌های محیطی، مواد جدید و همچنین ارزیابی آثار محیطی، مواد مرسوم در ساخت­ و ساز، لازم است. با توجه به تعاریف توسعه پایدار و مصالح پایدار، باید از مصالحی استفاده کرد که به لحاظ مصرف انرژی کم­ مصرف و دارای خواصی چون دوام کافی، خواص فیزیکی و شیمیایی مناسب باشند، در عین حال موجب کاهش آلایندگی ­محیط زیستی شوند. مصالح ژئوپلیمری می­ تواند پاسخ مناسبی برای این مسئله باشد. ژئوپلیمرها، پلیمرهای معدنی سرامیک ­مانندی هستند که با ساختارهای چندتراکمی در سه ­بعد گسترش می­ یابند. ژئوپلیمرها بر اثر فعال ­شدن شیمیایی مواد جامد دارای آلومینیم و سیلیس در دمای نسبتاً کم ایجاد می­ شوند. در سال­ های اخیر، ژئوپلیمرها به ­عنوان نوعی مصالح پایدار، دوست­دار محیط زیست و جایگزینی برای سیمان پرتلند مطرح شده ­اند. برای تولید بتن ژئوپلیمری و استفاده در ساختمان  می­ توان از پسماند­ها یا محصولات جانبی حاصل از صنایع استفاده کرد. در مقاله حاضر، روش سنتز و خواص ژئوپلیمرها برای استفاده در ساخت و ساز به ­عنوان مصالح پایدار و جایگزین مناسبی برای سیمان پرتلند­، به­ منظور کاهش انتشار آلاینده ­های ­محیط زیستی با رویکرد ارزیابی چرخه عمر براساس مطالعات انجام­ شده به ­طور خلاصه بررسی می­ شود. یافته ­ها و نتایج نشان می­ دهد، بتن ­های ژئوپلیمری خواص مکانیکی و عملکرد شیمیایی بسیار مطلوب­تری نسبت به بتن ­های ساخته ­شده از سیمان پرتلند دارند و مزایای  ­محیط زیستی درخور ‌توجهی نشان می­ دهند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigation the Properties of Geopolymers for Use as Sustainable Materials

نویسنده [English]

  • Alireza Esparham
University of Tehran, Department of Environmental Engineering
چکیده [English]

The further development of environmentally friendly materials requires the knowledge of environmental stimuli, new materials, as well as the assessment of environmental impacts, and the conventional materials in construction. According to the definitions of sustainable development and materials, it is necessary to use materials that have low energy consumption and properties such as sufficient durability, appropriate physical and chemical properties, and at the same time reduce environmental pollution. Geopolymer materials can be a suitable answer for this problem. Geopolymers are ceramic-like mineral polymers that expand with poly-compact structures in three dimensions. Geopolymers are formed by the chemical activation of solid materials containing aluminum and silica at relatively low temperature. In recent years, geopolymer has emerged as a sustainable, environmentally friendly material and an alternative to Portland cement. Geopolymers are ceramic-like materials with three-dimensional polycompact structures that are formed by the chemical activation of solids containing aluminum and silica at relatively low temperatures.  
In recent years, geopolymers have been proposed as a sustainable, environmentally friendly material and an alternative to concretes made of Portland cement. For the production of geopolymer concrete and use in buildings, waste or by-products from industries can be used. In this article, the synthesis method and properties of geopolymers for use in construction as sustainable materials and as a suitable alternative to Portland cement, in order to reduce the emission of environmental pollutants with the approach of life cycle assessment, based on the studies, are briefly reviewed. Findings and results show that geopolymer concretes have much better mechanical properties and chemical performance than hardened concretes with Portland cement and show significant environmental benefits.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • geopolymer
  • sustainable materials
  • life cycle assessment
  • greenhouse gases
  • sustainable development

مراجع

1.  Omer A.M., Energy, Environment and Sustainable Develop-ment, Renew. Sust. Energ., 12, 2265-2300, 2008. 
2.  Dickens C., Smakhtin V., McCartney M., O’Brien G., and   Dahir L., Defining and Quantifying National-Level Targets, 
Indicators and Benchmarks for Management of Natural   Resources to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals,   
Sustainability, 11, 462, 2019. 
3.  Mahdi Nejad J.-e.-D., Sadeghi Habib Abad A., and Lotfi   Zadeh G., The Necessity of Revitalizing the Traditional 
Elements Effective on Economic Sustainability and Cost Man-agement (Case Study of Tabatabai's House), Procedia Econ. 
Finance, 36, 81-88, 2016.
4.  Bielek B., Green Building–Towards Sustainable Architecture, Appl. Mech. Mater., 824, 751–760, 2016.
5.  Florez L. and Castro-Lacouture D., Optimization Model for Sustainable Materials Selection Using Objective and Subjec-
tive Factors, Mater. Des., 46, 310-321, 2013.
6.  Sagbansua L. and Balo F., A Novel Simulation Model for   Development of Renewable Materials with Waste-Natural 
Substance in Sustainable Buildings, J. Clean. Prod., 158, 245-260, 2017.
7.  Malhotra V.M., Reducing CO2 Emissions, ACI Concrete Int., 28, 42-45, 2006.
8.  García-Gusano D., Herrera I., Garraín D., Lechón Y., and Cabal H., Life Cycle Assessment of the Spanish Cement In-
dustry: Implementation of Environmental-Friendly Solutions, Clean. Technol. Environ., 17, 59-73, 2015. 
9.  Jingwei C., Ping Z, and Xue W., The Research on Sino-US Green Building Rating System, Energ Procedia, 5, 1205-1209, 
2011. 
10. Davidovits J., Geopolymers: Inorganic Polymeric New Mate-rials, J. Therm. Anal., 37, 1633-1656, 1991.
11. Davidovits J., Geopolymers: Ceramic-Like Inorganic Poly-mers, J. Ceram. Sci. Technol., 8, 335-350, 2017.
12. Sakulich A.R., Miller S., and Barsoum M.W., Chemical and Microstructural Characterization of 20 Month Old Alkali Acti-
vated Slag Cement, J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 93, 1741-1748, 2010. 
13. Sindhunata J.S.J., Lukey G.C., and Xu H., Effect of Curing Temperature and Silicate Concentration on Fly-Ash-Based 
Geopolymerization, Ind. Eng. Chem., 45, 3559-3568, 2006.
14. Kriven W.M., Bell J.L., and Gordon M., Microstructure and Microchemistry of Fully-Reacted Geopolymers and Geopoly-
mer Matrix Composites, Ceram. Trans., 153, 227-250, 2003. 
15.    Esparham A., Factors Influencing Compressive Strength of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymer Concrete, Modares Civil Eng. J. (Persian), 20, 53-66, 2020. 
16. Thomas B.S., Yang J., Mo K.H., Abdalla J.A., Hawileh R.A., and Ariyachandra E., Biomass Ashes From Agricultural 
Wastes as Supplementary Cementitious Materials or Aggre-gate Replacement in Cement/Geopolymer Concrete: A Com-
prehensive Review, J. Build. Eng., 40, 102332, 2021. 
17. Almutairi A.L., Tayeh B.A., Adesina A., Islam H.F, and Zeyad A.M., Potential Applications of Geopolymer Concrete in Con-struction: A Review, Case Stud. Constr. Mater., 15, e00733, 2021. 
18. Albitar M., Ali M.M., Visintin P., and Drechsler M., Durabil-ity Evaluation of Geopolymer and Conventional Concretes,   
Constr. Build. Mater., 136, 374-385, 2017. 
19. Esparham A., Moradikhou A.B., and Mehrdadi N., Intro-duction to Synthesise Method of Geopolymer Concrete and   
Corresponding Properties,  J. Iran. Chem. Soc. (Persian),  4, 13-24, 2020. 
20. Esparham A. and Moradikhou A.B., A Novel Type of   Alkaline Activator for Geopolymer Concrete Based on Class C   
Fly Ash, Adv. Civ. Eng., 3, 1-13, 2021. 
21.    Davidovits J., Geopolymers: Man-Made Rock Geosynthesis and the Resulting Development of Very Early High Strength Cement, J. Mater. Educ., 16, 91-91, 1994.
22. Esparham A., Moradikhou A.B., Andalib F.K., and Avanaki M.J., Strength Characteristics of Granulated Ground Blast 
Furnace Slag-Based Geopolymer Concrete,  Adv. Concr.   Constr., 11, 219-229, 2021.
23. Neupane K., Chalmers D., and Kidd P., High-Strength   Geopolymer Concrete-Properties, Advantages and Challeng-
es, Adv. Mater., 7, 15-25, 2018.
24. Singh N.B., Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Binder: A Future Construction Material, Minerals, 8, 299, 2018. 
25. Mane S. and Jadhav H., Investigation of Geopolymer Mortar and Concrete under High Temperature, Mater. Sci. Eng.,  1, 384-390, 2012. 
26. Moradikhou A.B., Esparham A., and Avanaki M.J., Effect of Hybrid Fibers on Water Absorption and Mechanical Strengths of Geopolymer Concrete Based on Blast Furnace Slag,  J.   Mater. Civ. Eng., 3, 195-211, 2019.
27. Moradikhou A.B., Hosseini M.H., Mousavi Kashi A., Emami F., and Esparham A., Effect of Simple and Hybrid Polymer 
Fibers on Mechanical Strengths and High-Temperature Resis-tance of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymer Concrete, Modares 
Civil Eng. J. (Persian), 20, 147-161, 2020.
28. Esparham A., Hosseini M.H., Mousavi Kashi A., Emami F., and Moradikhou A.B., Impact of Replacing Kaolinite with 
Slag, Fly Ash and Zeolite on the Mechanical Strengths of Geo-polymer Concrete Based on Kaolinite, Build. Eng. Hous. Sci. 
(Persian), 13, 9-15, 2020.
29. Davidovits J., Geopolymers: Ceramic-Like Inorganic   Polymers, J. Ceram. Sci. Technol., 8, 335-350, 2017. 
30. Lyon R.E., Foden A.J., Balaguru P., Davidovits J., and   Davidovics M., Properties of Geopolymer Matrix-Carbon Fi-
ber Composites, Fire. Mater., 21, 67-73, 1997. 
31. Davidovits J., Geopolymers Based on Natural and Synthetic Metakaolin: A Critical Review, Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc.,  38, 
201-214, 2018. 
32. Esparham A. and Moradikhou A.B., Factors Influencing Com-pressive Strength of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete, Amirkabir J. Civil Eng. (Persian), 53, 21-21, 2021.
33. Komnitsas K., Zaharaki D., and Perdikatsis V., Effect of Syn-thesis Parameters on the Compressive Strength of Low-Calci-um Ferronickel Slag Inorganic Polymers, J. Hazard. Mater., 161, 760-768, 2009.
34. Van den Heede P. and de Belie N., Environmental Impact and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Traditional and ‘Green’ Con-cretes: Literature Review and Theoretical Calculations, Cem. Concr. Compos., 34, 431-442, 2012.
35. Nabi Javid M. and Esparham A., A Review of Life Cycle As-sessment (LCA) in Quantifying Environmental Impacts of 
OPC and PFA Concrete Products, Civil. Project. J. (Persian), 3, 22-31, 2021. 
36. Chevalier B., Reyes T., and Laratte B., Methodology for Choosing Life Cycle Impact Assessment Sector-Specific   
Indicators. Paper Presented at the DS 68-5: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, Vol. 5: Design for X/Design to X, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08, 2011.
37. Dreyer L.C., Niemann A.L., and Hauschild M.Z., Comparison of Three Different LCIA Methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and 
Eco-indicator 99–Does It Matter Which One You Choose, Int. J. Life. Cycle. Assess., 8, 191–200, 2003.
38. Goedkoop M., Heijungs R., Huijbregts M., de Schryver A., Struijs J., and Van Zelm R., ReCiPe 2008, A Life Cycle Impact 
Assessment Method Which Comprises Harmonised Category Indicators at the Midpoint and the Endpoint Level, 1st ed.,   
Report I: Characterization, The Netherlands: Ruimte en Mi-lieu, Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en   
Milieubeheer, 1-126, 2009.
39. Weil M., Dombrowski K., and Buchwald A., Life-Cycle   Analysis of Geopolymers, In Geopolymers, Woodhead, 194-
210, 2009.
40. Esparham A., Investigation of the Effects of Nano Silica Particles and Zeolite on the Mechanical Strengths of Metaka-
olin-Based Geopolymer Concrete, Int. J. Innov, 1, 82-95, 2021. 
41. Esparham A. and Moradikhou A.B., A Novel Type of Alkaline Activator for Geopolymer Concrete Based on Metakaolin, J. Civ. Eng. Mater. Appl., 2, 57-65, 2021.
42. Rajan H.S. and Kathirvel P., Sustainable Development of   Geopolymer Binder Using Sodium Silicate Synthesized from 
Agricultural Waste, J. Clean. Prod., 286, 124959, 2021.
43. Esparham A., Moradikhou A.B., and Jamshidi Avanaki M.,   Effect of Various Alkaline Activator Solutions on Compres-
sive Strength of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete, J. Civ. Eng. Mater. Appl., 4, 115-123, 2020.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار