Chemical Classification of Corn Sheath Ash, Cassava Pulp Ash, and Granulated Blast Furnace Slag as Supplementary Cementitious Materials Using X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis

Self-compacting concrete (SCC) enhances constructability through high flowability and self-consolidation; however, its elevated cement demand increases cost and environmental impact. This study evaluates Corn Sheath Ash (CSA), Cassava Pulp Ash (CPA), and Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GBFS) as partial cement replacements in SCC. Cement was replaced at levels of 0–20% by mass at a constant water-to-binder ratio of 0.50, following EFNARC guidelines. Workability was assessed using slump flow tests, while compressive strength was measured at 7, 14, and 28 days. Increasing replacement levels resulted in reduced flowability for all materials. At 20% replacement, slump flow decreased from 755 mm for the control mix to 662 mm and 645 mm for CSA- and CPA-based SCC, respectively, whereas GBFS mixes maintained higher flowability (≈684 mm). Compressive strength declined with increasing CSA and CPA content, with 28-day strengths reducing to 25.5 MPa and 21.3 MPa, respectively, due to cement dilution and limited reactivity. In contrast, GBFS-containing SCC achieved a 28-day compressive strength of approximately 29.1 MPa at 20% replacement, attributed to its latent hydraulic behavior. CSA and CPA are suitable up to 10–15% replacement, while GBFS can be used up to 20% to produce sustainable SCC.

Self-compacting concrete, Agricultural waste ash, Workability, Compressive strength

1. Adesanya, D. A., & Raheem, A. A. (2009). Development of corn cob ash blended cement. Construction and Building Materials, 23(1), 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.11.013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Adesanya, D. A., & Raheem, A. A. (2010). A study of the workability and compressive strength characteristics of corn cob ash blended cement concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 23(1), 311–317. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Andrew, R. M. (2019). Global CO₂ emissions from cement production. Earth System Science Data, 11(4), 1675–1710. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1675-2019 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Aprianti, E., Shafigh, P., Bahri, S., & Farahani, J. N. (2015). Supplementary cementitious materials origin from agricultural wastes—A review. Construction and Building Materials, 74, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.10.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. ASTM C114. (2022). Standard test methods for chemical analysis of hydraulic cement. ASTM International. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. ASTM C618. (2023). Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete. ASTM International. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bernal, S. A., Provis, J. L., Walkley, B., San Nicolas, R., Gehman, J. D., Brice, D. G., Kilcullen, A., Duxson, P., & van Deventer, J. S. J. (2020). Gel nanostructure in alkali-activated binders based on slag and fly ash, and effects of accelerated carbonation. Cement and Concrete Research, 53, 127–144. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chindaprasirt, P., Jaturapitakkul, C., & Rattanasak, U. (2020). Influence of pozzolanic materials on strength and durability of concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 40, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cordeiro, G. C., Toledo Filho, R. D., & Fairbairn, E. M. R. (2019). Use of ultrafine sugar cane bagasse ash as mineral admixture for concrete. ACI Materials Journal, 106(1), 82–89. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. EFNARC. (2005). The European guidelines for self-compacting concrete. European Federation of National Associations Representing for Concrete. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Ganesan, K., Rajagopal, K., & Thangavel, K. (2008). Rice husk ash blended cement: Assessment of optimal level of replacement for strength and permeability properties of concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 22(8), 1675–1683. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Jenkins, R., Gould, R. W., & Gedcke, D. (2014). Quantitative X-ray spectrometry (2nd ed.). CRC Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Juenger, M. C. G., Winnefeld, F., Provis, J. L., & Ideker, J. H. (2019). Advances in alternative cementitious binders. Cement and Concrete Research, 41(12), 1232–1243. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Khankhaje, E., Rafieizonooz, M., Salim, M. R., Mirza, J., & Salmiati. (2020). Comparing the effects of oil palm shell fly ash and rice husk ash on concrete properties. Construction and Building Materials, 260, 119917. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Khayat, K. H. (2020). Workability, testing, and performance of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Materials Journal, 96(3), 346–353. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lea, F. M. (1970). The chemistry of cement and concrete (3rd ed.). Edward Arnold. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lothenbach, B., Scrivener, K., & Hooton, R. D. (2011). Supplementary cementitious materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 41(12), 1244–1256. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mehta, P. K. (2001). Reducing the environmental impact of concrete. Concrete International, 23(10), 61–66. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Mehta, P. K., & Monteiro, P. J. M. (2014). Concrete: Microstructure, properties, and materials (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Neville, A. M. (2011). Properties of concrete (5th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Okamura, H., & Ouchi, M. (2003). Self-compacting concrete. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, 1(1), 5–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Provis, J. L., & van Deventer, J. S. J. (2021). Alkali-activated materials: State-of-the-art report. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Scrivener, K. L., John, V. M., & Gartner, E. M. (2018). Eco-efficient cements: Potential, economically viable solutions for a low-CO₂ cement-based materials industry. Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 2–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Shi, C., Jiménez, A. F., & Palomo, A. (2015). New cements for the 21st century: The pursuit of an alternative to Portland cement. Cement and Concrete Research, 41(7), 750–763. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Siddique, R., & Khan, M. I. (2011). Supplementary cementing materials. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Taylor, H. F. W. (1997). Cement chemistry (2nd ed.). Thomas Telford. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Thomas, M. D. A. (2018). Supplementary cementing materials in concrete. CRC Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Thomas, M. D. A., Fournier, B., & Folliard, K. J. (2022). Alkali–silica reaction in concrete: A review of mechanisms, mitigation, and test methods. Cement and Concrete Research, 152, 106686. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Villar-Cociña, E., Valencia-Morales, E., González-Rodríguez, R., & Hernández-Ruiz, J. (2020). Kinetics of the pozzolanic reaction of sugar cane straw ash. Cement and Concrete Research, 33(4), 517–524. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Students' Perception Towards Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education in India
• Strategic Leadership and Cybersecurity Readiness in Digitally Transforming Organisations
• Spatial Distribution of Tourism Infrastructure in Awka, Onitsha and Nnewi Urban Areas of Anambra State.
• Emerging Technologies, Education and Skill Development for A Sustainable Blue Economy in Nigeria.
• Quantum Dot–Based Solar Cells: Advancements, Challenges, and Future Prospects