RESEARCH ARTICLE | SEPTEMBER 25 2019

The study on optimization of cement and fine aggregate by

blast furnace slag in concrete 
Ashita Singh  ; Sudhir Singh Bhadauria; Suresh Singh Kushwah; Kshitij Tare

AIP Conf. Proc. 2158, 020031 (2019)

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5127155

CrossMark

 
View Export
Online Citation

23 December 2023 13:17:03

 The Study on Optimization of Cement and Fine Aggregate
by Blast Furnace Slag in Concrete

Ashita Singh1,a)Sudhir Singh Bhadauria2, b), Suresh Singh Kushwah3, c) and Kshitij
Tare4, d)
1, 2, 3, 4
Department of Civil Engineering, University Institute of Technology, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal (M.P.) 462033, India.
a)
Corresponding author: ashitasingh2013@gmail.com
b)
ssbrgpv@gmail.com
c)
skushwah@rgtu.net
d)
kshitijtare@gmail.com

Abstract. Generation of industrial by-products has increased significantly with industrialization. One such by-product from iron

23 December 2023 13:17:03

smelting industry is iron slag, which is generated from blast-furnaces while extracting iron. This blast furnace slag is used to
make a cementitious material by grinding it into fine powder, known as Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS). This
blast furnace slag is also used to make a glassy granular product, Granulated blast furnace Slag (GBFS) which can be used as fine
aggregate. Present experimental work investigates feasibility of using GBFS as replacement of natural sand and GGBS as
replacement of cement in concrete respectively. Concrete cubes have been prepared and their compressive strength is checked for
M30 grade of concrete. Thus, it can be concluded that GGBS and GBFS can be used to partially replace cement up to 55% and
sand up to 50% in concrete respectively without affecting their compressive strength. Thereby reducing carbon dioxide emission
and curtailing cost of concrete by 20.25%.

INTRODUCTION
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is most important ingredient used for production of concrete. Production of
cement involves emission of large amount of carbon-dioxide gas into atmosphere which accounts for 6-7% of CO2
emitted globally by human activities. CO2 is a greenhouse gas resulting in global warming. Hence, there is an urgent
need for construction industry to look for alternative pozzolanic materials like fly ash, GGBS, silica fumes, red mud
etc. for reducing consumption of cement. According to Indian Minerals Yearbook (2015)[1] during the year 2014-
15, production of blast furnace slag from Visvesvaraya Iron and Steel Plant Bhadravati (Karnataka), Durgapur Steel
Plant, Durgapur (West Bengal) and Bhilai Steel Plant (Chhattisgarh) was 24.56 lakh tones. Production of granulated
blast furnace slag and steel slag was 13.25 lakh tonnes and 7.89 lakh tonnes respectively. Their disposal is a serious
environmental challenge. If the industrial waste produced is not handled properly, it poses threat to environment.
There are abundant examples of using GGBS in concrete for construction project. The concrete used in construction
of World Trade Centre has about 40% GGBS as replacement to cement. Ground Granulated Blast furnace slag is a
by-product obtained during manufacture of pig iron. Molten slag is instantaneously quenched by water. Rapid
quenching of molten slag, under high pressure facilitates formation of granules granulated blast furnace slag
(GBFS).Granulated Blast Furnace Slag is processed to form fine powder known as Ground Granulated Blast
Furnace slag (GGBS). GGBS hardens when water is added by virtue of its hydraulic property and hence, it can be
used as pozzolanic material.

Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Materials and Structures for Civil Infrastructures (SMSCI2019)
AIP Conf. Proc. 2158, 020031-1–020031-7; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5127155
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1903-2/$30.00

020031-1
 BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW
Shi and Qian (2000) [2] and Peter and H.D. Wong (2010) [3] inferred that manufacture of GGBS requires
lesser energy as compared with energy needed for production of Portland cement. Production of Portland cement is
an energy-intensive process, while grinding of blast furnace slag needs approximately 10% of energy required for
production of Portland cement.
Oner and Akyuz (2007)[4] studied that optimum level of ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) in
concrete enhances compressive strength of concrete. Test specimens obtained by addition of 0%, 15%, 30%, 50%,
70%, 90% and 110% of GGBS as partial replacement to cement in concrete and cured for 7, 14, 28, 63, 119, 180
and 365 days before compressive strength testing. It is observed that early age compressive strength of GGBS
concrete mixtures is low. The compressive strength of GGBS concrete increases with increase in curing time. The
test results proved that compressive strength of concrete mixtures containing GGBS increases with increase in
GGBS quantity, with an optimum range from 55% to 59% of total binder content (Cement and GGBS).
Zhou et al. (2010)[5] in their investigations found that, replacement of Portland cement by limestone
powder, and BFS (Blast Furnace Slag) can lower cost, thus, making concrete eco-friendly. Mix proportioning is
done experimentally, by adjusting quantity of limestone powder and BFS, and is tested for flexure and tensile
strength. This mix ratio at twenty-eight days, for Engineered Cementitious Composite (ECC) exhibits a high tensile
strain capacity and compressive strength of 38 MPa.
Xiaolu and Huisheng (2010) [6] in their experiments compared two specimens, namely ‘Specimen-A’ of
plain cement concrete and ‘Specimen-B’ with GGBS up to 20-50% as partial replacement of cement. For Specimen-
B the consistency decreased from 27.0 to 26.40%. as compared with ‘Specimen-A’ (one without steel slag powder).
Also, ‘Specimen-B’ showed delay in initial Setting time from 200 minute to 260 minute and their final setting time
from 340 minute to 450 minute, respectively.
Marriaga et al. (2011)[7] in their research compared OPC to Slag Powder and inferred that slag has higher
silica and lower calcium contents, and contains low quantities of ferric oxide. For GGBS, the glass content is around

23 December 2023 13:17:03

85% – 90%. The hydration of slag involves complex chemical and physical reactions such as adsorption, ion
exchange, dissolution, and hydrolysis, etc.
RafatSiddiquea (2012)[8] found that use of GGBS accelerates hydration of ordinary Portland cement at
early ages of hydration process, thus, reducing water requirement of cement with increase in GGBS content.
Inclusion of GGBS improved workability of mortar/concrete and also increased setting times of cements. Strength
of mortar incorporating GGBS is associated to surface area and particle size distribution. Concrete containing 60%
of slag showed better sulphate resistance than OPC.
Singh et al. (2015) [9] in their studies replaced sand from concrete by 10% to 100% by GBFS and studied
its effect on compressive strength of concrete. The study had been conducted for concrete subjected to artificial
marine environment. The most optimum percentage of GBFS to be used in normal conditions considering both
strength and economy factor is from 40% to 50% and for marine conditions it’s from 50% to 60%. The long term
strength development of GBFS concrete is almost double of normal concrete in both normal and marine conditions.
Attari et al. (2016)[10] demonstrated in their research that increased amount of CSH (Calcium-Silicate-
Hydrate) gel produced at later ages of hydration of cementitious material results in more refined pore structure,
which enhances impermeability and thereby durability of concrete. The quality of GGBS concrete depends on its
curing and efficient curing reduces permeability, also improves concrete resistance against aggressive chemical
attacks.
The study of research papers for work done in field of utilization of blast furnace slag showed that GGBS
and GBFS can be used in production of concrete. Hence it can be concluded that these materials can efficiently
replace cement and sand respectively in concrete.

PRESENT RESEARCH WORK

The aim of this research work is to study the feasibility of utilization of BFS in making concrete. The main
objectives of the study are as follows:
i. To measure the compressive strength of concrete containing GGBS as replacement to cement and optimizing
the quantity of percentage GGBS replacement to cement form optimum compressive strength of concrete so
obtained.

020031-2
 ii. To measure the compressive strength of concrete containing GBFS as replacement to fine aggregate and
optimizing the quantity of percentage GBFS replacement to fine aggregate required in making green concrete of
desired target strength.
iii. To design mix proportions for economic and environment friendly concrete prepared using GGBS and GBFS
as replacement to cement and fine aggregate respectively .

Raw Materials Used

Material used in making concrete cubes for compressive strength test are Cement, Coarse aggregate, Fine aggregate,
GGBS, GBFS and water. Material testing has been carried out for the purpose of design of mix proportioning.
Laboratory test results for Fineness, Consistency, Soundness, Initial setting Time, Final setting time, Specific
Gravity and Compressive strength for mortars are shown in Table 1. The specific gravity for Natural Sand, GBFS,
and Coarse Aggregate is 2.59, 2.56, and 1.84 respectively.
Table 1Comparative properties of Cement and GGBS
S. No. Properties Cement GGBS
1 Fineness 4.0 % 4.0 %
2 Consistency 33.0 % 32.0 %
3 Soundness 2.00 mm 1.00 mm
4 Initial Setting time 93 minutes 63 minutes
5 Final setting time 220 minutes 142 minutes
6 Specific gravity 3.15 2.74

23 December 2023 13:17:03

Three Days 28.3 19.84
2
7 Compression test (N/mm ) Seven Days 35.78 19.87
Twenty-Eight Days 54.25 53.07

Table 2 shows Results of sieve analysis of natural sand and GBFS in accordance with , according to IS-
383-1970[10], are shown in Table 2. Fine aggregate conforms to Zone II.

Table 2Sieve analysis of natural sand and GBFS

Sand GBFS
S. No. Sieve size Cumulative
Weight retained Cumulative Weight Weight retained
Weight retained
(gram) retained (gram) (gram)
(gram)
1 4.75 mm 6 6 7 6
2 2.36 mm 3 9 5 11
3 1.18 mm 220 229 225 236
4 0.60 mm 20 249 19 255
5 0.30 mm 550 799 570 825
6 0.15 mm 136 935 120 945
7 Pan 60 995 45 990

Experimental Procedure
M 30 grade concrete is designed in accordance with provisions in IS 10262: 2009[10] for laboratory
experiments. The experiment is done in two steps, first step is to find the optimum percentage of GGBS replacement

020031-3
for cement in concrete. In second step, optimized percentage of GBFS replacement for sand is measured in concrete
obtained in first step.
In the first step of experiment, cement is partially replaced by GGBS to optimize the content of GGBS in
concrete. Ten specimens of concrete with different percentage of GGBS (0%, 10%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%,
45%, 50%, and 55%) content are prepared. Testing for compressive strength of concrete for seven days and twenty-
eight-days has been done. Table 3 shows various specimens of concrete mix with different percentage of GGBS and
measured compressive strength of concrete for seven days and twenty-eight-days. In the second step of experiments,
specimens which shows best results in strength and economy in step one, is used for the optimization of fine
aggregate. For this part of research, sand is replaced by 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% GBFS and testing for
compressive strength for seven days and twenty-eight-days is done. Table 4 shows various specimens of concrete
mix with optimized percentage of GGBS, varying percentage of GBFS and seven days and twenty-eight-day
compressive strength. The testing for compressive strength is done as per the specifications of IS10262 [10].

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results and Discussion

The compressive strength of specimens after seven and twenty eight days curing with varying percentage of
GGBS is shown in Table3. Target strength of M30 grade of concrete used for present research experimentation is
38.25 N/mm2 and after seven days curing the specimens are expected to achieve 25 N/mm2 approximately. Fig. 1
shows the compressive strength of concrete with varying percentage of GGBS. From the results illustrated in Fig. 1
it is inferred that concrete containing GGBS up to 30% in specimen M0, M1 and M2 achieved considerable strength
for 7 days curing but beyond 30% GGBS replacement to cement in specimen M3, 7 days compressive strength
decreases suddenly to the extent that minimum desired target strength for present mix proportion is not achieved.

23 December 2023 13:17:03

Table 3 Compressive strength with varying percentages of GGBS as replacement to cement

S. Specimen Percentage GGBS Compressive strength Seven Compressive strength for Twenty-
No. Name Content (%) days Curing (N/mm2) Eight Days Curing (N/mm2)

I II III IV V
1 M0 0 28.21 39.58
2 M1 15 27.211 36.46
3 M2 30 26.211 35.55
4 M3 40 23.418 45.10
5 M4 50 15.14 42.44
6 M5 55 12.53 40.38
7 M6 60 11.87 37.07
8 Desired Compressive strength 26.01 (Approx.) 38.25

It is observed from the experimental results in Fig. 1, that with increase in percentage of GGBS, 28 days
compressive strength decreases initially for specimens M1 and M2, but thereafter it increases and achieves a peak
value of 45.10 N/mm2 at 40% GGBS replacement to cement. After achieving the peak value, 28 days compressive
strength trend-line portrays a depression attaining strength of 42.44 N/mm2 and 40.38 N/mm2 for specimens M4
(50% GGBS) and M5 (55% GGBS) respectively. The specimen M6 with 60% GGBS replacement to cement
achieved compressive strength of 37.07 N/mm2 which is lesser than the desired target mean strength for designed
mix proportion of concrete.
55% GGBS replacement to cement is taken up for next stage of experimentation as it makes use of
maximum quantity of GGBS replacing cement in concrete which satisfies the criteria of achieving target mean
compressive strength as indicated in Fig. 1, specimen M5 with 55% GGBS replacement to cement has achieved 28
days strength of 40.38 N/mm2 against desired minimum compressive strength of 38.25 N/mm2.

020031-4
 For larger percentage of GGBS as in specimens M3 (40% GGBS), M4 (50% GGBS) and M5 (55% GGBS)
gain in strength for initial period does not satisfy desired strength criteria for 7 days curing, however for 28 days
curing desired target strength is achieved as illustrated in Table 3. It indicates slow pozzolanic reaction in concrete
containing larger quantity of GGBS.

7 Days 28 Days
50
Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

45 40, 45.10
55, 40.38
40 0, 39.58
15, 36.46 50, 42.44
35
30, 35.55 60, 37.07
30
40, 23.42
25 0, 28.21 15, 27.21 30, 26.21
20
50, 15.14 60, 11.87
15
10 55, 12.53
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Percentage of GGBS
FIGURE 1. Compressive strength of concrete with varying percentage of GGBS

In the second step of experiment, specimens of concrete have been made with fifty-five percentage GGBS

23 December 2023 13:17:03

content and the sand is partially replaced by GBFS in different percentages varying from 0% to 50%. The specimens
with GGBS and GBFS have been tested for seven days and twenty-eight days’ compressive strength in accordance
with IS 516. The details of specimens, GBFS content, seven days and twenty-eight days’ compressive strength
results are indicated in table 4 and depicted in Fig. 2.

Table 4Compressive Strength of concrete with 55% GGBS as replacement to cement and Varying
percentages of GBFS as replacement to sand

Compressive strength for

S. Specimen Percentage Compressive strength
Twenty- Eight Days Curing
No. Name GBFS Content (%) Seven days Curing (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)

1 MD0 0 12.53 40.38

2 MD1 10 13.69 41.79
3 MD2 20 15.39 43.03
4 MD3 30 18.09 44.52
5 MD4 40 22.59 48.32
6 MD5 50 21.31 42.09

A steady increase in both 7 and 28 days compressive strength has been observed for specimen containing 0
to 40% GBFS replacement to natural sand. Thereafter gradual fall is observed for both 7 and 28 days strength. Peak
value of 48.32 N/mm2 for 28 days compressive strength and 22.586 N/mm2 for 7 days compressive strength has
been achieved at 40% GBFS replacement to natural sand. Similarly 28 days compressive strength of 42.09 N/mm2
and 7 days compressive strength of 21.31 N/mm2 has been achieved at 50% GBFS replacement to sand. It is evident
from the Fig. 2 that proposed mix proportion of concrete with GGBS/cement and GBFS/sand is not able to achieve
desired target strength in seven days curing. However, desired target mean compressive strength of 38.25N/mm2 is

020031-5
achieved at 28 days curing for 0% to 50% GBFS replacement to sand with a peak strength of 48.32 N/mm2 at 40%
GBFS replacement to sand.
Accordingly 50% GBFS replacement to natural sand in manufacturing concrete is proposed as it is
achieving desired target mean strength with maximum replacement to natural sand by GBFS. Thus making concrete
more economic and environmental friendly.

7 Days 28 Days
60
Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

40, 48.32
50
30, 44.52
10, 41.79
40 20, 43.028 50, 42.096
0, 40.38

30
40, 22.586
30, 18.091
20
10, 13.69 50, 21.31
20, 15.39
10 0, 12.53
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percentage of GBFS

23 December 2023 13:17:03

FIGURE 2.Compressive strength of concrete with 55% of GGBS & varying percentage of GBFS

Cost Analysis
The analysis of rates has been done in accordance with the DAR-2016 CPWD [12]. Table 5 shows analysis
of rates for the concrete with GGBS and GBFS. The rates for GGBS and GBFS have been taken after market survey
in order to use locally available pozzolanic material. For making one cubic meter of concrete using OPC 53 and
river sand, the material cost incurred is Rs.3898.78/- whereas when GGBS and GBFS have been used as per the
optimization, the cost has been curtailed to Rs.3109.05/- The difference in cost for one cubic meter of concrete is
Rupees 789.70/-. The percentage savings per cubic meter are 20.25%.

Table 5Comparative Rate Analysis of Plain Concrete and Blast Furnace Concrete
Plain Cement Concrete (M30) GGBS + GBFS Concrete (M30)
S. Rate Rate
Description Quantity Amount Quantity Amount
No. (Rs. per (Rs. Per
(kg/m3) (Rupees) (kg/m3) (Rupees)
kg) kg)
1 Coarse Aggregates 1342 0.70 939.4 1342 0.70 939.4
2 Sand 603 0.46 277.38 301.5 0.46 138.69
3 GBFS Not used in PCC 301.5 0.45 135.675
4 OPC 53 447 6.0 2682 201.2 6.0 1206.9
5 GGBS Not used in PCC 245.9 2.8 688.38
Total 3898.78 Total 3109.05

020031-6
 CONCLUSIONS
During the course of experiment, compressive strength of concrete specimens with and without BFS has
been studied. The results showed that in order to make cost effective and ecofriendly concrete, fifty-five percent of
GGBS and fifty percent of GBFS can be used in concrete as partial replacement to cement and river sand
respectively. Using these proportions, green concrete with economy in construction and reduced CO2 emissions can
be achieved. Also by practicing this idea, river sand can be conserved. Also this river bank conservation can be
achieved by adopting this practice.

FUTURE SCOPE OF THIS RESEARCH

This work can further be extended by replacing cement and sand completely from concrete by making use
of appropriate admixtures or chemicals.

REFERENCES
1. Indian Minerals Yearbook, Part II: Metals and Alloys, 54th Edition Iron and steel slag (Final Release),
Government of India, Ministry of Mines, Indian Bureau of Mines, Indira Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur,
Maharashtra, 440001(2015).
2. C. Shi and J. Qian, “High performance cementing materials from industrial slags - A Review,” Resources,

23 December 2023 13:17:03

Conservation and Recycling, 29(3), pp. 195-207,(2000).
3. P.W.C. Leung and H. D. Wong, “Final report on durability and strength development of ground granulated blast
furnace slag concrete,” Hong Kong: Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Development
Department, (2010).
4. A. Oner and S. Akyuz, “An experimental study on optimum usage of GGBS for the compressive strength of
concrete,”Cement and Concrete Composites, 29, pp.505–514,(2007).
5. J. Zhou, S. Qian, M.G.S.Beltran, G. Ye, K. V. Breugel and V. C. Li, “Development of engineered cementitious
composites with limestone powder and blast furnace slag,”Materials and Structures,43, pp. 803-814 (2010).
6. X. Guo and H. Shi, “Utilization of steel slag powder as a combined admixture with ground granulated blast-
furnace slag in cement based materials,”Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 25(12), pp.1990-1993 (2013).
7. J. L. Marriaga, P. Claisse and E. Ganjian, “Effect of steel slag and Portland cement in the rate of hydration and
strength of blast furnace slag pastes”Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 23(2), pp. 1-22 (2011).
8. R. Siddiquea and R.Bennacer, “Use of iron and steel industry by-product (GGBS) in cement paste and
mortar,”Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 69, pp.29-34 (2012).
9. G. Singh, S. Das, A. A. Ahmed, S. Saha, and S. Karmakar, “Study of granulated blast furnace slag as fine
aggregates in concrete for sustainable infrastructure,” World Conference On Technology, Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, pp. 2272-2279 (2015).
10. A. Attari, C. Mcnally and M.G. Richardson, “A probabilistic assessment of the influence of age factor on the
service life of concretes with limestone cement/GGBS binders,” Construction and Building Materials, 111, pp.
488-494 (2016).
11. Analysis of rates for Delhi Vol-1 and Vol-2. Central Public Works Department, CPWD Nirman Bhawan, New
Delhi-110011.
12. IS 10262, Concrete Mix Proportionong--Guidelines, New Delhi, India: Bureau of Indian Standard (2009).
13. IS 383, Specification for Coarse and Fine Aggregates from Natural Sources for Concrete, New Delhi, India:
Bureau of Indian Standard (1970).
14. IS 456, Plain and Reinforced Concrete code of Practice, New Delhi, India: Bureau of Indian Standard (2000).

020031-7