Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

A novel eco-friendly porous concrete fabricated with coal ash

and geopolymeric binder: Heavy metal leaching characteristics
and compressive strength
J.G. Jang, Y.B. Ahn, H. Souri, H.K. Lee ⇑
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daehak-ro 291, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, South Korea

h i g h l i g h t s

 A novel type of porous concrete made solely with industrial byproducts was developed.
 Heavy metal leaching characteristics and compressive strength were studied.
 Characteristics of geopolymer affected the diffusion of heavy metals from bottom ash.
 The porous concrete showed acceptable compressive strength and leaching behavior.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study focuses on the development of a novel type of eco-friendly porous concrete made solely with
Received 21 September 2014 industrial by-products. Coal bottom ash was used as a coarse aggregate and geopolymer as a binder.
Received in revised form 8 January 2015 Experimental evaluations of heavy metal leaching behavior and compressive strength were conducted.
Accepted 10 January 2015
The test results showed the concentrations of heavy metals which leached from the bottom ash in porous
Available online 22 January 2015
concrete were below the selected criteria, and the characteristics of geopolymer dominantly affect the
diffusion of heavy metals from bottom ash. In addition, a significant correlation was observed among
Keywords:
the paste thickness, measured total void ratio and compressive strength, and an empirical formula to
Coal ash
Porous concrete
express the relationship between the void ratio and compressive strength was derived. It is concluded
Heavy metals that the porous concrete developed in this study can effectively immobilize heavy metals as solidified/
Geopolymer stabilized products.
Void ratio Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Compressive strength

1. Introduction Coal ash is an industrial by-product of coal-fired power plants

Porous concrete is a construction material that contains large
interconnected voids. These voids are created by omitting fine
aggregate from conventional normal concrete. This allows porous
concrete to have numerous characteristics and capabilities, such
as water permeability, acoustic absorption, water purification,
SOx and NOx adsorption, humidity control, and even functions
related to vegetation [1–6]. Unlike piled earth materials, which
also have permeability and other benefits, porous concrete can
be fabricated into various shapes and strengths. Moreover, it is
highly durable. Due to these numerous advantages and its wide
range of applications, porous concrete has recently attracted a con-
siderable amount of attention as an eco-friendly construction
material that is in harmony with nature.
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 42 350 3623; fax: +82 42 350 3610.
E-mail address: haengki@kaist.ac.kr (H.K. Lee).
that can be divided into fly ash and bottom ash. The generated
amounts of fly ash and bottom ash differ between power plants,
though fly ash usually accounts for 70–90% of the total amount
of coal ash, whereas bottom ash accounts for 10–30% [7,8]. Fly
ash has been actively recycled as cement and concrete admixtures
[8]. On the other hand, the recycling of bottom ash remains rare
even with a guideline for bottom ash recycling as a road base mate-
rial, sub-base aggregate and structural fill material [9,34]. The
chemical composition and physical properties of bottom ash differ
from those of fly ash, and bottom ash generally contains more
heavy metals as compared to fly ash [10]. Therefore, sending haz-
ardous bottom ash to landfills incurs the risk of ground water pol-
lution due to heavy metal leaching while also requiring large tracts
of land. The proper recycling of bottom ash is urgent, and several
studies have found that the solidification of bottom ash with
cementitious materials reduces the amount of heavy metals which

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.058
0950-0618/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
174 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181

leach from it to below many environmentally acceptable criteria by Table 1

both physical and chemical means [7,11]. Chemical composition and specific surface areas of the fly ash and BFS.

Over the past few decades, much studies dealing with the Chemical composition (%) Fly ash BFS
effects of the void ratio, water-to-cement ratio, coarse aggregate SiO2 42.10 35.17
characteristics, and cement paste characteristics on the strength Al2O3 28.60 13.93
and functionality of porous concrete have been conducted CaO 6.26 42.47
[6,7,12–15]. Although typical mix proportions for porous concrete Fe2O3 14.40 0.58
MgO 2.60 4.12
fabricated with ordinary cement paste and gravel have been made K2O 2.40 0.46
available in recent years, there are only a few studies dealing with SO3 0.61 2.03
the utilization of coal bottom ash as a coarse aggregate material for Na2O3 – 0.15
use in the formulation of porous concrete. Park et al. [7], investi- Specific surface areas (m2/kg) 290 485
gated the toxicity of bottom ash and the mechanical properties
of porous concrete fabricated with bottom ash and Portland
cement paste, and concluded that mixing with reinforcing element The coal bottom ash used in this study is from the Seocheon thermoelectric
was necessary to improve the strength of porous concrete using power plant in South Korea. It was first sieved using 2.5 mm, 5 mm, and 13 mm
sieves to obtain two groups of bottom ash, one with a grading of 2.5–5 mm, and
bottom ash, as the mechanical strength tended to decrease as the
the other with a grading of 5–13 mm. The two groups were then washed well to
bottom ash mixing ratio increased. In addition, Park et al. [7] remove the fine powder of the bottom ash as well as other impurities. The chemical
reported that porous concrete using bottom ash coarse aggregate composition of the bottom ash used in this study was determined by X-ray fluores-
satisfied environmentally acceptable criteria for heavy metals. cence (XRF) using MiniPal 2 from PANanalytical. These results are listed in Table 2.
On the other hand, geopolymers represent a type of alkali-acti- The XRF analysis shows that SiO2, Al2O3, and Fe2O3 comprise nearly 90% of the bot-
tom ash for both sizes. The amounts of heavy metals in the bottom ash, fly ash and
vated binder which is considered to be a more eco-friendly coun- BFS, in this case chromium, copper, arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury were
terpart of cementitious materials which may also offer high investigated with inductively coupled plasma (ICP) using the iCPA-6300 Duo ICP-
strength and remarkable durability [16–20]. The main materials OES and ICP/MS 7700X spectrometers. These results are listed in Table 3. The test
used to make geopolymers consist of recycled ingredients such samples for the ICP analysis were pretreated using a microwave sample digestion
system (operating condition: 210 °C, microwave power range of 1000 W) manufac-
as coal fly ash, blast furnace slag, and metakaolin, which are hard-
tured by Milestone Inc. with nitric acid and hydrochloric acid, after which they were
ened in an alkaline environment created by waterglass, NaOH, diluted with ultrapure water. The physical properties of the bottom ash were deter-
KOH, or a combination of these alkali-activators [19]. Therefore, mined through a series of experiments in accordance with the procedure described
it is expected that porous concrete fabricated with coal ash and in ASTM C127-12 [33]. The details of the physical properties of the bottom ash are
geopolymeric binder, a novel type of porous concrete developed given in Table 4. The obtained apparent specific gravity (ASG), bulk specific gravity
(BSG), and water absorption ratio (WAR) values were calculated by Eqs. (1)–(4)
in this study, will provide the following advantages. First, coarse [33].
aggregate and cementitious binder, the major parts of porous con-
crete, can be completely composed of recycled industrial by-prod- ASG ¼ W OD =ðW OD  W UW Þ ð1Þ

ucts, enabling a more effective use of our resources. Second, it will

be more cost-effective compared to normal porous concrete, as the
production of porous concrete is possible on-site, where the fly ash
and bottom ash are generated. Third, geopolymers generally create
fewer capillary pores than Portland cement paste. For this reason,
less heavy metal leaching from bottom ash can be expected.
In the present study, a novel type of porous concrete utilizing
coal ash and geopolymeric binder was developed. Bottom ash from
a coal-fired power plant was employed as a coarse aggregate mate-
rial and geopolymeric binder (alkali-activated fly ash/slag paste)
was used as the cementitious binder material for the fabrication
of the porous concrete. The present study aims to investigate the
heavy metal leaching characteristics and the compressive strength
of porous concrete fabricated with coal bottom ash and the afore-
mentioned geopolymeric binder through a series of characteriza-
tion tests. An experimental evaluation of the macro- and micro-
structures, heavy metal leaching, void ratio, and compressive
strength of the porous concrete was conducted for this purpose.
In addition, the experimental results of porous concrete fabricated
with the geopolymeric binder were compared to the results of por-
ous concrete made with the ordinary Portland cement paste.
BSGOD ¼ W OD =ðW SSD  W UW Þ ð2Þ
BSGSSD ¼ W SSD =ðW SSD  W UW Þ ð3Þ
WAR ¼ ðW SSD  W OD Þ=W OD  100% ð4Þ
Here, WOD is the weight of the oven dried (OD) aggregate, WUW is the apparent
weight of the aggregate under water, and WSSD is the weight of the surface-saturated
dried (SSD) aggregate. In addition, a measurement method for the absolute volume
ratio of bottom ash can be found in JIS A 1104 [38].
Porous concrete has a small amount of mixing water and a large amount of
coarse aggregate; thus, it is necessary to consider whether or not the water content
on the surface of the aggregate is stable. Therefore, air-dried bottom ash aggregates,
with controlled water content levels of approximately 3–5%, were used to eliminate
the effect of the water contained within the bottom ash and to minimize the
absorption of the cement paste resulting from the drying of the bottom ash.
2.2. Mix proportion and fabrication method of the porous concrete
Four types of paste were used for the fabrication of the porous concrete. The
mix proportion of the cement paste and the geopolymer paste used in this study
is listed in Table 5. The water-to-cement (w/c) ratios of the cement paste were
determined to be 0.25 and 0.3, which are commonly used w/c ratios for fabricating
porous concrete. Alkali-activator-to-binder (a/b) ratios of 0.5 and 0.6 were utilized
for the geopolymer paste. The mix proportion of the geopolymer paste used in this

2. Experimental procedure
Table 2
2.1. Raw materials Chemical composition of the bottom ash.

Fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag (BFS) were used as geopoly- Chemical composition (%) 2.5–5 mm 5–13 mm
meric binder materials. The slag-to-binder ratio of 0.5 was determined to synthe- SiO2 49.90 50.10
size geopolymeric binder. The chemical composition and specific surface areas of Al2O3 29.30 26.90
the fly ash and BFS used in this study are listed in Table 1. The fly ash and BFS were CaO 1.64 3.95
synthesized at room temperature using an alkali-activator which was made with a Fe2O3 10.50 10.80
4 M NaOH solution and waterglass (SiO2/Na2O = 2.16, water content = 61.5 wt%, K2O 4.69 4.22
specific gravity = 1.38). The mass ratio of the NaOH solution/waterglass for the TiO2 2.83 2.52
alkali-activator is 2. Detailed information pertaining to the preparation of the ZrO2 0.15 0.14
alkali-activator and the geopolymeric binder can be found in Jang et al. [16]. In Cl 0.57 1.10
addition, Type I Portland cement was used as a reference material.
 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181 175

Table 3
ICP analysis results for heavy metal contents of the bottom ash, fly ash, and BFS in ppm.

Cr Cu As Pb Cd Hg
Bottom ash 2.5–5 mm 121.952 276.220 3.416 335.578 139.524 ND
Bottom ash 5–13 mm 162.988 278.698 6.718 370.109 ND ND
Fly ash 0.431 9.103 8.128 0.002 ND ND
BFS 0.047 NDa 0.274 ND ND ND
a
ND: Not detected.

Table 4
Physical properties of the bottom ash.
Grade ASG BSGOD BSGSSD WAR (%) Absolute volume ratio (%)
(mm)
2.5–5 1.67 1.57 1.63 4.06 51.2
5–13 1.93 1.82 1.88 3.02 45.9
study was determined referring to a previous study conducted by Jang et al. [16],
considering the compressive strength and workability of the geopolymer paste.
To investigate the effect of the a/b ratio, the bottom ash grade, the paste-to-bottom
ash (P/B) ratio, and the mixing procedure on the properties of porous concrete fab-
ricated with the geopolymeric binder and bottom ash, various mix proportions
were tested. In addition, reference specimens were fabricated with porous concrete
made from bottom ash and ordinary Portland cement paste. The mix proportion of
the porous concrete specimens tested in this study is listed in Table 6.
The mixing of the porous concrete was done in two ways. Mixing procedure (A)
proceeded as follows: the cementitious materials (cement, or fly ash + BFS) and the
bottom ash were put into a mixer and dry mixing was carried out for 1 min. Then,
water or the alkali-activator was slowly added and this was mixed for 2 min. On the
other hand, mixing procedure (B) proceeded as follows: the fly ash, the BFS, and the
alkali-activator were mixed for 2 min to make a fresh geopolymer paste. Bottom ash
was then put into the mixer, and this was mixed for 2 min. Fresh porous concrete
samples were cast into cylindrical molds 10 cm in diameter and 20 cm high, and
were consolidated by an electric vibrator. After de-molding, the porous concrete
specimens were cured under atmospheric pressure and laboratory humidity at
20 °C. Cross-section images of the porous concrete specimen made using the two
bottom ash grades are shown in Fig. 1.
2.3. Evaluations of macro- and micro-structures
The microstructural characteristics of the geopolymer paste and the Portland
cement paste, which affect the physical leaching behavior of heavy metals, were
evaluated by means of mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) in accordance with
ASTM D4284-12 [35] on an Autopore VI machine by Micromeritics Corp. In addi-
tion, a microscope image analysis was conducted using a UC-CAM digital micro-
scope manufactured by Shenzhen Technology to observe the microstructure of
porous concrete samples and to determine the paste thickness surrounding the bot-
tom ash.
2.4. Heavy metal leaching test
A leaching test was carried out in an effort to analyze the leaching behavior of
heavy metals from within the porous concrete made using coal bottom ash. To test
the leaching amount of heavy metals with a direct method, NSF/ANSI 61-2007a
(Drinking water system components – Health effects) [21] was used on hardened
porous concrete specimens. Cylindrical specimens with a diameter of 10 cm and a
height of 20 cm were used for this test, and the test solution was refilled after 1,
2 and 4 days. The solution was collected after 1, 2, 4 and 5 days to analyze the
six heavy metal elements of chromium, copper, arsenic, lead, cadmium and
mercury. The specimen preparation process and the exposure condition were in
accordance with NSF/ANSI 61-2007a [21]. Nitric acid was used to control the pH
of the solution at a level of 4-5, and ICP–MS was used to measure the concentration
of each heavy metal element.
2.5. Void ratio test
The open-void ratio (Aopen, or interconnected pore), the closed-void ratio (Aclose,
or disconnected pore) and the total void ratio (Atotal) of the porous concrete were
measured based on Eqs. (5)–(7), respectively [3,36,37].
 
ðW 2  W 1 Þqw
Aopen ¼ 1  100% ð5Þ
V1
 
ðW 3  W 1 Þqw
Aclose ¼ 1   100%  Aopen ð6Þ
V1
Atotal ¼ Aopen þ Aclose ð7Þ
In this equation, W1 is the weight of the specimen while it is completely sub-
merged in water, W2 is the weight of the specimen after it is dried in air for 24 h,
W3 denotes the weight of the specimen after it is completely dried in an oven, V1
is the volume of the specimen, and qw is the density of water.
2.6. Compressive strength test
A compressive strength test was done in accordance with the procedure
described in ASTM C39 [22]. Cylindrical specimens were tested at ages of 7 days
and 28 days using a 300 kN universal testing machine (UTM). Each specimen’s
top and bottom surfaces were ground beforehand to prevent a concentrated loading
condition. Each specimen was then air dried for one day and placed in the center of
the pedestal of the UTM, aligning the axis of the specimen with that of the cross
head. The speed of the cross head was set to 0.01 mm/s. Three specimens were
tested for each compressive strength test.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Macro- and micro-structures
The thicknesses of the cement and geopolymer pastes sur-
rounding the bottom ash were measured at 35 and 200 magni-
fication levels using a UC-CAM digital microscope (see Fig. 2).
These results are listed in Table 7. The distances between two
bottom ash particles or voids were considered as a measure of
the paste thickness, with at least five locations observed under
magnification of 35 and one location observed under magnifica-
tion of 200. The thickness of the paste that surrounds the bottom
ash is a factor in the bonding strength between adjacent bottom
ash particles; furthermore, the paste acts as a filler of the open
voids of the porous concrete. It should be noted that the measured
paste thicknesses vary depending on the measured locations

Table 5
Mix proportion of the cement paste and geopolymer paste.

Paste type w/c a/b Unit weight (kg/m3)

Cement Fly ash BFS Water NaOH Waterglass
Cement 0.25 1753 438
0.3 1612 484
Geopolymer 0.5 616 616 354 57 205
0.6 557 557 384 61 223
176 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181

Table 6
Mix proportion of the porous concrete specimens.

Specimen Paste type w/c a/b Bottom ash grade (mm) P/B (vol./vol.) Target void ratio Mixing procedure
C1 Cement 0.25 2.5–5 0.20 0.29 (A)
C2 0.25 5–13 0.20 0.34
C3 0.3 2.5–5 0.20 0.29
C4 0.3 5–13 0.20 0.34
G1 Geopolymer 0.5 2.5–5 0.20 0.29
G2 0.5 5–13 0.20 0.34
G3 0.6 2.5–5 0.20 0.29
G4 0.6 5–13 0.20 0.34
G5 0.5 2.5–5 0.20 0.29 (B)
G6 0.5 5–13 0.20 0.34
G7 0.5 5–13 0.25 0.29
G8 0.5 5–13 0.30 0.24

centrations of leached heavy metals were below the MCL/MAC cri-

teria in all cases (C3, C4, and G5–G8). This signifies that the leached
water from the porous concrete satisfied the standard for a public
drinking water supply [21]. In addition, it can be inferred that
heavy metals such as chromium, copper, arsenic, lead, cadmium,
and mercury in bottom ash can be immobilized by the fabrication
process of porous concrete presented here. On the other hand, the
concentrations of heavy metals leached for C3 and C4 were below

(a) 2.5 - 5 mm (b) 5 - 13 mm Paste Bottom ash

Fig. 1. Cross-section images of the porous concrete specimen made using the two
bottom ash grades: (a) 2.5–5 mm; (b) 5–13 mm.

mainly due to the non-uniform thickness of the surrounding paste.

From the test results, the paste thickness of the porous concrete
using the geopolymer was smaller than that of the cement paste,
even when same volumetric amount of paste was used (see C1,
C2, G1, and G2). In general, the viscosity of sodium silicate-acti-
vated slag or fly ash paste is higher than that of Portland cement
paste [39,40]. Consequently, it may influence the amount of paste
which flows in porous bottom ash, resulting in the difference in
paste thickness of porous concrete. In addition, the difference in
the thickness of the paste due to the different mixing methods
showed that procedure (B) was more effective in reducing the
amount of paste absorbed into the bottom ash (see G1, G2, G5,
(a) 35× magnification
and G6).
The MIP test results of the geopolymer paste and the Portland
cement paste are shown in Fig. 3. The pore size of the geopolymer Paste Bottom ash
paste is distributed within the ranges of under 0.01 lm and 0.1–
10 lm, while that of the cement paste is more concentrated in
the range of 0.01–1 lm. The total porosity calculated from MIP test
for four pastes with w/c = 0.25, w/c = 0.3, a/b = 0.5, and a/b = 0.6
were 22.1%, 24.6%, 19.8%, 20.5%, respectively. The geopolymer
paste used in this study had a smaller pore volume than the ordin-
ary Portland cement paste. In addition, the average pore diameter
calculated from the MIP test, again, for the four pastes were
38.0 nm, 40.8 nm, 13.3 nm, 24.1 nm, respectively, showing the dis-
tribution of smaller pore sizes in the geopolymeric paste than in
the ordinary Portland cement paste.

3.2. Heavy metal leaching characteristics

The heavy metal leaching test results with single time-point

(b) 200× magnification
exposure sequence according to NSF/ANSI 61-2007a, the drinking
water regulatory level criteria (MCL/MAC), and the single-product Fig. 2. Measurement of paste thickness using microscope: (a) 35 magnification
allowable concentration (SPAC) [21] are listed in Table 8. The con- and (b) 200 magnification.
 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181 177

Table 7 0.3
Measured paste thickness in lm using microscope. w/c=0.25, cement paste
Specimen 35 magnification (S/Da) 200 magnification 0.25 w/c=0.3, cement paste
a/b=0.5, geopolymer paste

V/ logD (ml/g)
C1 1287 (624) 835
0.2 a/b=0.6, geopolymer paste
C2 1078 (382) 753
G1 633 (338) 360
G2 819 (667) 354 0.15
G5 840 (494) 521
G6 1007 (648) 765 0.1
G7 1848 (559) N/Ab
G8 4314 (1721) N/A 0.05
a
S/D: Standard deviation.
b
N/A: Cannot be measured. 0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Pore diameter, D ( m)
the SPAC recommended levels, while the concentrations of arsenic (a)
for G5–G8 were 0.001440 mg/L, 0.001642 mg/L, 0.001871 mg/L,
and 0.002283 mg/L, respectively, exceeding the thresholds by 40
factors of 1.5–2.3. Note that the threshold concentrations for the w/c=0.25, cement paste, porosity: 22.1%

Cumulative pore area (m2/g)

six heavy metals described in SPAC are a mere 1/10 of the value
of those described in MCL/MAC for a public drinking water supply,
with 10 being the safety factor based on a risk assessment [21].
Nevertheless, the leached amounts of arsenic for G5–G8 were com-
paratively much larger than those for C3 and C4, which can be
explained in terms of the amount of arsenic in the fly ash used
for the fabrication of the geopolymer paste. The fly ash used in this
study contained 8.128 ppm of arsenic, which is even higher than
the amount in the bottom ash (see Table 3). In general, arsenic is
known for its high solubility in a wide range of pH levels as well
as its tendency to form oxyanions in solutions [23]. It can be
deduced from such characteristics that the dominant leaching
mechanism for arsenic is a surface wash off mechanism at the ini-
tial stages from the geopolymer paste, which is in direct contact
with the solution [24].
The accumulated concentrations of leached heavy metals are
shown in Fig. 4. From the results shown in Fig. 4(b and c), the
leaching rates and the accumulated concentrations of arsenic and
copper, of which fly ash contains considerable amounts, were
higher for G5–G8 than for C3 and C4. From this result, it can be
concluded that the leaching mechanism of arsenic and copper is
mainly affected by the surface wash off mechanism for geopolymer
paste, as mentioned above. On the other hand, the leaching rates
and the accumulated concentrations of the four heavy metals
which exist in relatively low amounts in fly ash, i.e., chromium,
lead, cadmium, and mercury, of G5–G8 were lower than or equal
to those of C3 and C4, revealing that the leaching mechanism is
mainly diffusion. As explained in Section 3.1, the values of the total
porosity and average pore diameter of the geopolymer paste used
in this study were lower than those of Portland cement paste with
w/c ratios of 0.25 and 0.3. This indicates that the critical pore
radius (or maximum continuous pore radius) which affects the
permeability of the paste is small [25,26]. In conclusion, the leach-
ing test results confirm the characteristics of the pores in the geo-
polymer paste dominantly affect the diffusion of heavy metals
from bottom ash. From these results, it can be concluded that por-
ous concrete fabricated with coal bottom ash and a geopolymeric
binder is valuable for the immobilization of heavy metals in solid-
ified/stabilized products.
3.3. Void ratio and unit weight
The measured void ratio and unit weight of the porous concrete
are listed in Table 9. In addition, the relationship between the tar-
get void ratio and the measured void ratio is shown graphically in
Fig. 5. The void ratio of the porous concrete has an immense effect
on many of its functionalities, and it is conventional to consider the
35
w/c=0.3, cement paste, porosity: 24.6%
30
a/b=0.5, geopolymer paste, porosity: 19.8%
25
a/b=0.6, geopolymer paste, porosity: 20.5%
20
15
10
5
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Pore diameter, D ( m)
(b)
Fig. 3. MIP test results of the geopolymer paste and the Portland cement paste: (a)
pore size distribution and (b) cumulative pore area.
target void ratio in the mix proportions [15,27]. However, bottom
ash has rough surfaces, resulting in a smaller absolute volume ratio
than gravel; it also has high absorption due to the many pores on
its surface (refer to Table 4). Thus, the interrelationship between
the target void ratio and the measured total void ratio is crucial
with regard to the mix proportion of porous concrete using bottom
ash. As shown in Fig. 5, the measured total void ratio of the porous
concrete utilizing the geopolymer paste was much larger than the
target void ratio intended with the mix proportions (see C1–C4 and
G1–G4). G1 and G3, which contain 2.5–5 mm grades of fine bottom
ash, had measured total void ratios that were larger than the target
void ratio by more than 11%. On the other hand, G2 and G4, which
contain 5–13 mm grades of coarse bottom ash, had measured total
void ratios that were closer to the target void ratios than G1 and G3
with fine bottom ash.
This phenomenon can be explained in terms of both the charac-
teristics of the powder used for the synthesis of the geopolymer
and the water absorption ratio of the coal bottom ash. For porous
concrete using coal bottom ash, the cement or geopolymer paste
intended for the coverage of the aggregate can be absorbed into
the aggregate (i.e., increasing the open-void ratio). Because the
2.5–5 mm grade of bottom ash has a water absorption rate of
4.06% while the 5–13 mm grade of bottom ash has a water absorp-
tion rate of 3.02% (see Table 4), this characteristic is more percep-
tible with porous concrete created using fine bottom ash.
On the other hand, G1–G4 follow mixing procedure (A), as
described in Section 2.2. Fly ash, BFS, and bottom ash are dry mixed
in procedure (A); BFS, which has a relatively large specific surface
area (i.e., fine particles), may have entered the surface voids of the
178 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181

Table 8
The heavy metal leaching test results with single time-point exposure sequence according to NSF/ANSI 61-2007a, the drinking water regulatory level criteria (MCL/MAC), and the
single-product allowable concentration (SPAC) [21].

(mg/L) Cr Cu As Pb Cd Hg
C3 0.000879 0.028442 0.000375 0.000052 0.000001 0.000003
C4 0.000185 0.025293 0.000306 0.000121 0.000004 0.000018
G5 0.000278 0.010425 0.001440 0.000082 0.000001 0.000021
G6 0.000285 0.027728 0.001642 0.000224 0.000002 0.000013
G7 0.000276 0.041189 0.001871 0.000090 0.000002 0.000025
G8 0.000228 0.056172 0.002283 0.000274 0.000004 0.000008
MCL/MAC 0.1 1.3 0.01 0.015 0.005 0.002
SPAC 0.01 0.13 0.001 0.0015 0.0005 0.0002

10 200

of heavy metal leached (ppb)

of heavy metal leached (ppb)

C3 G7
Accumulated concentration

Accumulated concentration
9 Chromium 180 Copper
8 160 G8
7 140
6 G5 120 G6
5 100 C4
G6
4 80
G7 C3
3 60
2 C4 40 G5
1 G8 20
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (days) Time (days)

(a) (b )
45 1
of heavy metal leached (ppb)

G8
of heavy metal leached (ppb)

G6
Accumulated concentration
Accumulated concentration

40 Arsenic 0.9 Lead

G5 0.8
35 G8
G6 0.7
30 C3
G7 0.6
25 G5
0.5
20 G7
0.4
15
0.3
10 0.2 C4
C4
5 0.1
C3
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (days) Time (days)
(c) (d )
0.030 0.20
C4
of heavy metal leached (ppb)
of heavy metal leached (ppb)
Accumulated concentration

Accumulated concentration

0.025 Cadmium Mercury

C3 0.16 G5
0.020 G8 C3
0.12
G7 G6
0.015
C4 0.08 G7
0.010 G6
0.04
0.005
G5 G8
0.000 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (days) Time (days)

(e) (f)
Fig. 4. Accumulated concentrations of leached heavy metals (ppb): (a) chromium, (b) copper, (c) arsenic, (d) lead, (e) cadmium and (f) mercury.
 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181 179

bottom ash. Such segregation of raw materials can complicate the 45

design of mix proportion for porous concrete using coal bottom
ash. In contrast, G5 and G6, which were made with procedure G3 G1 G4
(B), had less of a difference between the target void ratio and the
measured total void ratio than those made with procedure (A). This 40

Measured total void ratio, Atotal (%)

G2
signifies that preparing fresh geopolymer paste before incorporat-
G5 G6
ing bottom ash lowers the segregation of the raw materials.
C2
For porous concrete using identical grades of bottom ash and 35
geopolymer paste, an evident linear relationship between the P/B C4
ratio and the measured total void ratio existed. In addition, as
the P/B ratio increased, the measured total void ratio became closer G7
to the designed target void ratio. Porous concrete made with geo- 30
polymer paste had an average unit weight that is only about 90% of C3
the unit weight of porous concrete made with the same amount of
G8
cement paste, making it possible to fabricate light-weight porous
concrete. 25

3.4. Compressive strength

The compressive strength test results for the porous concrete
specimens are shown in Fig. 6. Although the G1–G4 and C1–C4
specimens have identical P/B ratios, the compressive strength
greatly varied with respect to the type of paste used. The compres-
sive strength of the 28-day geopolymer paste made with an
a/b = 0.5 as used in this study was found to be 55 MPa [16], which
is larger than the typical compressive strength of ordinary Portland
cement paste with a w/c ratio of 0.3, at 48.5 MPa [28]. Nevertheless,
the compressive strengths of G1–G4 were found to be significantly
lower than those of C1–C4; the cause of this can be traced to the
void ratio of the porous concrete. This provides evidence of the seg-
regation of the raw materials during the mixing of the porous con-
crete made using the geopolymeric paste, as described in Section
3.3. On the other hand, when comparing G5 and G6, which follow
mixing procedure (B), with G1, G2, and C1–C4, it is obvious that
the mixing procedure affected the compressive strength, akin to
the effect on the measured total void ratio of the porous concrete
made with the geopolymeric binder.
For porous concrete specimens with varying P/B ratios (G6–G8),
a direct linear relationship was recognized at higher P/B ratios. G7,
which has a measured total void ratio similar to those of C1–C4,
showed similar compressive strength levels as well, while G8,
which has a total void ratio of 24%, showed higher compressive
strength than C1–C4. In general, the total void ratio strongly affects
the compressive strength of porous concrete [15,27,29,30]. The
relationship between the measured total void ratio and the com-
pressive strength found in this study is shown in Fig. 7. Empirical
formulas to express the relationship between the total void ratio
and the compressive strength have been proposed by many
researchers. Fig. 7 shows both the empirical relationship from this
study and suggested equations devised by other researchers
20
20 25 30 35 40 45
Target void ratio (%)
Fig. 5. Target void ratio versus measured void ratio.
[15,27,29,31]. Eq. (8) describes the derived relationship between
the total void ratio and the compressive strength of porous con-
crete using bottom ash, where the correlation is affirmed with an
R2 value of 0.81.
0
f c ¼ 151:17eð0:105Atotal Þ ð8Þ
0
Here, f c is the compressive strength and Atotal is the measured total
void ratio of the porous concrete.
The correlation between the total void ratio and the compres-
sive strength of porous concrete made using bottom ash was
remarkably different from that of porous concrete made using
gravel, as shown in Fig. 7. This is due to the low strength of bottom
ash given its many internal voids and resulting weak structure. In
fact, there exist countless micro-sized voids inside bottom ash that
cannot be detected with the type of void ratio test used in this
study (see Fig. 8). These voids can have a negative effect on the
compressive strength of porous concrete. In addition, this result
is in agreement with that of a previous study which found that
the compressive strength of normal concrete using bottom ash is
lower than that of concrete using normal aggregates [32]. On the
other hand, it can be expected that the compressive strength of
porous concrete using bottom ash will be higher than that using
recycled aggregate given the results shown in Fig. 7.

Table 9
Measured void ratio and unit weight of the porous concrete.

Specimen Target void ratio Aopen (%) Aclose (%) Atotal (%) Unit weight (kg/m3)
C1 0.29 25.5 7.7 33.2 1296
C2 0.34 32.0 3.9 35.9 1302
C3 0.29 22.1 7.8 29.8 1309
C4 0.34 28.7 5.6 34.3 1325
G1 0.29 31.3 8.9 40.2 1090
G2 0.34 31.5 7.3 38.9 1201
G3 0.29 32.8 7.8 40.5 1111
G4 0.34 34.1 6.2 40.3 1146
G5 0.29 30.7 8.7 39.3 1132
G6 0.34 31.2 7.1 38.2 1202
G7 0.29 27.9 4.8 32.7 1298
G8 0.24 18.4 5.7 24.1 1405
180 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181

Compressive strength (MPa) 10

9 7 day 28 day
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
C1 C2 C3 C4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8
Fig. 6. Compressive strength test results for the porous concrete specimens.

12

11

10

9
Compressive strength (MPa)

4 OPC paste
Geopolymer paste
3 Chindaprasirt et al. (2008); gravel
Yamamoto et al. (2008); gravel
2 Fig. 8. Micro-sized voids in coal bottom ash.
Lian et al. (2011); gravel
1 Bhutta et al. (2013); recycled aggregates
This study; coal bottom ash
0
20 25 30 35
Total void ratio, Atotal (%)
Fig. 7. Measured total void ratio versus compressive strength.
4. Conclusions
The present study focused on the development of a novel type
of porous concrete with all ingredients replaced with industrial
by-products. The prospects for the porous concrete fabricated with
coal ash and a geopolymeric binder made in this study are bright
due to its improved recyclability, good economics, low weight,
and early strength development compared to normal porous con-
crete. The alkali-activator-to-binder ratio of the geopolymer, the
grades of the bottom ash, the P/B ratio, and the mixing procedure
were the independent variables in this study. The following con-
clusions can be drawn from the experimental results of this work.
(1) The concentrations of the heavy metals which leached were
all below the MCL/MAC criteria described in the NSF/ANSI
61-2007a in all porous concrete samples fabricated with coal
ash and a geopolymeric binder. The leaching mechanism of
arsenic and copper, which are relatively abundant in fly
ash, was dominantly affected by the surface wash off process
of the geopolymer paste; the leached amount of arsenic from
the porous concrete samples with the geopolymer paste did
40 45
not meet the criteria of the maximum concentrations
according to the SPAC criteria described in the NSF/ANSI
61-2007a by factor of 1.5–2.3. On the other hand, the values
of the total porosity and average pore diameter of the geo-
polymer paste used in this study were lower than those of
Portland cement paste when the w/c ratios were 0.25 and
0.3, with the results also confirming that the characteristics
of the pores in the geopolymer mainly affect the diffusion of
the heavy metals from the bottom ash.
(2) Porous concrete with bottom ash had a much higher mea-
sured total void ratio than the target void ratio intended in
the mix proportions. This phenomenon was more noticeable
with small grades of bottom ash (i.e., high absorption rate),
the adoption of mixing procedure (A), and with the use of
a geopolymer paste. However, the difference between the
measured total void ratio and the target void ratio decreased
with the adoption of mixing procedure (B) and a higher P/B
ratio. This characteristic can be applied during the mix pro-
portioning stage for porous concrete fabricated with coal
bottom ash and a geopolymeric binder to produce porous
concrete with desired void ratios and strength levels.
(3) A significant correlation was recognized among the mea-
sured total void ratio, the paste thickness surrounding the
bottom ash, and the compressive strength. The porous
 J.G. Jang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 79 (2015) 173–181
concrete fabricated with the coal bottom ash and the
geopolymeric binder showed lower compressive strength
compared to normal porous concrete fabricated with gravel
and cement; however, the strength was higher than that of
porous concrete fabricated with recycled aggregates and
cement paste. In addition, an empirical formula to express
the relationship between the total void ratio and the com-
pressive strength was derived from the test results. Lastly,
it was concluded that porous concrete fabricated with coal
bottom ash and a geopolymeric binder is valuable due to
its ability to immobilize heavy metals in solidified/stabilized
products with acceptable compressive strength.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by a grant from the Energy Tech-
nology Development Program (Grant No. 2013T100100021)
funded by the Ministry of Trade Industrial and Energy of the Kor-
ean government. This research was also sponsored by the National
Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grants funded by the Korean
government (NRF-2012R1A2A4A01008855). The authors are grate-
ful to Prof. H.K. Kim from Department of Architectural Engineering
in Chosun University, Dr. K.H. Cho and Ms. E.S. Jung from Daeduck
Analysis Institute in KAIST for their helpful advice with the
experiments.
References
[1] Tarnai M, Mizuguchi H, Hatanaka S, Katahira H, Nakazawa T, Yanagibashi K,
Kunieda M. Design, construction and recent applications of porous concrete in
Japan. In: 28th conference on our world in concrete & structures, Singapore;
22–28 August, 2013.
[2] Kim HK, Lee HK. Acoustic absorption modeling of porous concrete considering
the gradation and shape of aggregates and void ratio. J Sound Vib
2010;329:866–79.
[3] Kim HK, Lee HK. Influence of cement flow and aggregate type on the
mechanical and acoustic characteristics of porous concrete. Appl Acoust
2010;71:607–15.
[4] Ghafoori N, Dutta S. Building and nonpavement applications of no-fines
concrete. J Mater Civ Eng 1995;7:286–9.
[5] Voler A, Watson T, Viswanathan B. Potential use of pervious concrete for
maintaining existing mature trees during and after urban development. Urban
For Urban Greening 2009;8:249–56.
[6] Park SB, Tia M. An experimental study on the water-purification properties of
porous concrete. Cem Concr Res 2004;34:177–84.
[7] Park SB, Jang YI, Lee J, Lee BJ. An experimental study on the hazard assessment
and mechanical properties of porous concrete utilizing coal bottom ash coarse
aggregate in Korea. J Hazard Mater 2009;166:348–55.
[8] Blissett RS, Rowson NA. A review of the multi-component utilisation of coal fly
ash. Fuel 2012;97:1–23.
[9] American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM E1861-97: Standard guide
for use of coal combustion by-products in structural fills. ASTM International;
1997.
[10] Menéndez E, Álvaro AM, Hernández MT, Parra JL. New methodology for
assessing the environmental burden of cement mortars with partial
replacement of coal bottom ash and fly ash. J Environ Manage
2014;133:275–83.
[11] Li XD, Poon CS, Sun H, Lo IMC, Kirk DW. Heavy metal speciation and leaching
behaviors in cement based solidified/stabilized waste materials. J Hazard
Mater 2001;82:215–30.
181
[12] Yang J, Jiang G. Experimental study on properties of pervious concrete
pavement materials. Cem Concr Res 2003;33:381–6.
[13] Neptune AI, Putman BJ. Effect of aggregate size and gradation on pervious
concrete mixtures. ACI Mater J 2010;107. 627-3.
[14] Mahboub KC, Canler J, Rathbone R, Robl T, Davis B. Pervious concrete:
compaction and aggregate gradation. ACI Mater J 2009;106:523–8.
[15] Chindaprasirt P, Hatanaka S, Chareerat T, Mishima N, Yuasa Y. Cement paste
characteristics and porous concrete properties. Constr Build Mater
2008;22:894–901.
[16] Jang JG, Lee NK, Lee HK. Fresh and hardened properties of alkali-activated fly
ash/slag pastes with superplasticizers. Constr Build Mater 2014;50:169–76.
[17] Lee NK, Lee HK. Setting and mechanical properties of alkali activated fly ash/
slag concrete manufactured at room temperature. Constr Build Mater
2013;47:1201–9.
[18] Gartner E. Industrially interesting approaches to ‘‘low-CO2’’ cements. Cem
Concr Res 2004;34:1489–98.
[19] Duxson P, Fernandez-Jimenez A, Provis JL, Lukey GC, Palomo A, Van Deventer
JSJ. Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art. J Mater Sci
2007;42:2917–33.
[20] Xu H, Gong W, Syltebo L, Izzo K, Lutze W, Pegg IL. Effect of blast furnace slag
grades on fly ash based geopolymer waste forms. Fuel 2014;133:332–40.
[21] NSF International Standard/American National Standard. NSF/ANSI 61-2007a,
Drinking water system components – Health effects. NSF International; 2007.
[22] American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM C39: Standard test method
for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. ASTM
International; 2012.
[23] Simedley PL, Kinniburgh DG. A review of the source, behaviour and
distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Appl Geochem 2002;17:517–68.
[24] Malviya R, Chaudhary R. Leaching behavior and immobilization of heavy
metals in solidified/stabilized products. J Hazard Mater 2006;37:207–17.
[25] Halamickova P, Detwiler RJ, Bentz DP, Garboczi E. Water permeability and
chloride ion diffusion in Portland cement mortars: relationship to sand
content and critical pore diameter. Cem Concr Res 1995;25:790–802.
[26] Atkinson A, Nickerson AK. The diffusion of ions through water-saturated
cement. J Mater Sci 1984;19:3068–78.
[27] Lian C, Zhuge Y, Beecham S. The relationship between porosity and strength
for porous concrete. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:4294–8.
[28] Ortega EA, Cheeseman C, Knight J, Loizidou M. Properties of alkali-activated
clinoptilolite. Cem Concr Res 2000;30:1641–6.
[29] Bhutta MAR, Hasanah N, Farhayu N, Hussin MW, Tahir MBMT, Mirza J.
Properties of porous concrete from waste crushed concrete (recycled
aggregate). Constr Build Mater 2013;47:1243–8.
[30] Bhutta MAR, Tsuruta K, Mirza J. Evaluation of high-performance porous
concrete properties. Constr Build Mater 2012;31:67–76.
[31] Yamamoto T, Koike S, Makino T, Hatanaka S. Proceedings of the Japan Concrete
Institute 2008;30:289–94. (in Japanese).
[32] Singh M, Siddique R. Effect of coal bottom ash as partial replacement of sand
on properties of concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 2013;72:20–32.
[33] American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM C127-12: Standard test
method for density, relative density (specific gravity), and absorption of coarse
aggregate. ASTM International; 2012.
[34] Manz OE. Worldwide production of coal ash and utilization in concrete and
other products. Fuel 1997;76:691–6.
[35] American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM D4284–12: Standard test
method for determining pore volume distribution of catalysts and catalyst
carriers by mercury intrusion porosimetry. ASTM International; 2012.
[36] Japan Concrete Institute. Technical committee report on eco-concrete. Japan
Concrete Institute; 1995. (in Japanese).
[37] Japan Concrete Institute. Technical committee report on design and
construction of porous concrete. Japan Concrete Institute; 2003. (in Japanese).
[38] Japanese Standard Association. JIS A 1104: Methods of test for bulk density of
aggregates and solid content in aggregates. Japanese Standard Association;
2006. (in Japanese).
[39] Palacios M, Banfill PFG, Puertas F. Rheology and setting of alkali-activated slag
pastes and mortars: effect of organic admixture. ACI Mater J 2008;105:140–8.
[40] Rattanasak U, Pankhet K, Chindaprasirt P. Effect of chemical admixtures on
properties of high-calcium fly ash geopolymer. Int J Miner Metall Mater
2011;18(3):364–9.