Investigation of the High Temperature Resistance of Foam Concrete Produced with Dıfferent Cem-II Type Cements

Year 2026, Volume: 15 Issue: 1 , 350 - 359 , 24.03.2026

Selçuk Memiş , Hasbi Yaprak , Emre Kıvanç

https://doi.org/10.17798/bitlisfen.1810438

https://izlik.org/JA26WT94BG

Abstract

In this study, three foam concrete mixtures—each utilizing pumice aggregate and fixed foam/water content (240–50–220 g/dm³) but differing in binder type (PKB-I: CEM II/A-M (S–L); PKB-2: CEM II/A-S; PKB-3: CEM II/A-LL)—were comprehensively examined in terms of their fresh and hardened properties, permeability indicators, and high-temperature behavior. The mixtures were produced with constant mix ratios, and parameters such as density (fresh/hardened), total water absorption, open porosity, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV), and compressive strength at 3, 7, and 28 days were determined. For high-temperature evaluation, the specimens were exposed to 200, 400, 600, and 800 °C, and the corresponding mass loss and strength variation (%) were calculated. The results indicated that early-age mechanical development was strongly influenced by binder chemistry, with strength ranking at day 3 following the order PKB-2 > PKB-3 > PKB-I; by day 7, these differences had narrowed, and by day 28, all three systems converged to approximately 10.5–10.8 MPa. Although PKB-2 exhibited the highest unit weight, it also demonstrated the greatest porosity and water absorption. Ultrasonic pulse velocity showed a positive correlation with density and a negative correlation with porosity within the same density range. As temperature increased, mass loss gradually rose, converging at around 18–20% at 800 °C. Limited strength gains were observed between 200 °C and 400 °C due to internal water redistribution and gel relaxation, while all mixtures exhibited significant strength reductions at ≥600 °C; the limestone-based system (PKB-3) showed more pronounced losses associated with CaCO₃ decomposition. Overall, CEM II/A-LL proved suitable for lightweight elements requiring low water absorption, CEM II/A-S for applications prioritizing early-age strength, and CEM II/A-M (S–L) provided a balanced design window between mechanical, transport, and thermal stability.

Keywords

Foam concrete , CEM II/A-S , CEM II/A-L , High temperature , Water absorption rate , Pporosity , UPV.

Ethical Statement

The study is complied with research and publication ethics.

References

• G. Zhou, R. K. Leung Su, “A review on serviceability of foam concrete,” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Constr. Mater., 177 (2024) 381–392. https://doi.org/10.1680/jcoma.24.00004.
• M. Davraz, S. Kilinçarslan, M. Koru, F. Tuzlak, “Investigation of relationships between ultrasonic pulse velocity and thermal conductivity coefficient in foam concretes,” Acta Phys. Pol. A., 130 (2016) 469–470. https://doi.org/10.12693/APhysPolA.130.469.
• E. Ikponmwosa, F. Falade, C. Fapohunda, “A review and investigations of some properties of foamed aerated concrete,” Niger. J. Technol., 33 (2014) 1. https://doi.org/10.4314/njt.v33i1.1.
• A. Król, Z. Giergiczny, J. Kuterasinska-Warwas, “Properties_of_concrete_made_with_recycle,” Materials (Basel)., (2019) 2257.
• K. T. Wan, H. Zhu, T. Y. P. Yuen, B. Chen, C. Hu, C. K. Y. Leung, J. S. Kuang, “Development of low drying shrinkage foamed concrete and hygro-mechanical finite element model for prefabricated building façade applications,” Constr. Build. Mater., 165 (2018) 939–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.024.
• S. J. Yu, Y. L. Wang, B. J. Duan, J. W. Zhou, F. Yang, X. G. Wang, D. L. Liang, “Fireproof Performance of Foam Concrete Insulation Board,” Adv. Mater. Res., 250–253 (2011) 474–479. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.250-253.474.
• L. Húlek, M. Ba, M. Cápay, I. Janotka, “Perspective of concrete with portland composite cement CEM II/C-M (S-LL),” 29 (2024) 54–70.
• K. Křížová, P. Novosad, T. Jarolím, “Production of Self Compacting Concrete SCC with Portland and Blended Cement CEM I, CEM II with Fly Ash and Limestone Admixtures,” Adv. Mater. Res., 1124 (2015) 45–50. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1124.45.
• M. W. Tait, W. M. Cheung, “A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs,” Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 21 (2016) 847–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1045-5.
• E. Klingsch, A. Frangi, M. Fontana, “Experimental Analysis of Concrete Strength at High Temperatures and after Cooling,” Acta Polytech., 49 (2009). https://doi.org/10.14311/1087.
• T. McKenna, M. G. Richardson, B. O’Rourke, “Heat Transfer Characteristics of GGBS Concrete in Fire,” J. Sustain. Archit. Civ. Eng., 8 (2014) 45–58. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.8.3.7457.
• P. Kirton, A. Richardson, B. Agnew, “Thermo-mechanical performance of concrete with alternative binder material,” Struct. Surv., 31 (2013) 368–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/SS-01-2013-0002.
• O. Gencel, T. Bilir, Z. Bademler, T. Ozbakkaloglu, “A Detailed Review on Foam Concrete Composites: Ingredients, Properties, and Microstructure,” Appl. Sci., 12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/app12115752.
• E. P. Kearsley, P. J. Wainwright, “Porosity and permeability of foamed concrete,” Cem. Concr. Res., 31 (2001) 805–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(01)00490-2.
• E. K. K. Nambiar, K. Ramamurthy, “Sorption characteristics of foam concrete,” Cem. Concr. Res., 37 (2007) 1341–1347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.05.010.
• ASTM C642-21, Standard Test Method for Density, Absorption, and Voids in Hardened Concrete, n.d.
• TS EN 12504-4, Testing concrete in structures - Part 4: Determination of ultrasonic pulse velocity, n.d.
• TS EN 196-1, Methods of testing cement - Part 1: Determination of strength, 2016.
• A. Moosavi, S. Asadi, H. J. Shoraki, “Microstructure and mechanical properties of tabular alumina composites with geopolymer binder at elevated temperatures,” Ceram. Int., 45 (2019) 9092–9098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.01.246.
• Z. Zhang, J. L. Provis, A. Reid, H. Wang, “Mechanical, thermal insulation, thermal resistance and acoustic absorption properties of geopolymer foam concrete,” Cem. Concr. Compos., 62 (2015) 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.03.013.
• ASTM 597-22, Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through Concrete, n.d.
• C. Liu, G. Liu, “Characterization of pore structure parameters of foam concrete by 3D reconstruction and image analysis,” Constr. Build. Mater., 267 (2021) 120958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120958
• A. Jierula, H. Li, Y. Chen, C. Wu, X. Wu, H. Yin, “Study on the Influence of Density and Water–Cement Ratio on the Cement Utilization, Fluidity, Mechanical Properties, and Water Absorption of Foam Concrete,” Buildings, 14 (2024) 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113550.
• O. H. Oren, A. Gholampour, O. Gencel, T. Ozbakkaloglu, “Physical and mechanical properties of foam concretes containing granulated blast furnace slag as fine aggregate,” Constr. Build. Mater., 238 (2020) 117774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117774.
• S. K. Jose, M. Soman, Y. Sheela Evangeline, “Ecofriendly building blocks using foamed concrete with ground granulated blast furnace slag,” Int. J. Sustain. Eng., 14 (2021) 776–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2020.1836064.
• A. A. Elgalhud, R. K. Dhir, G. Ghataora, “Limestone addition effects on concrete porosity,” Cem. Concr. Compos., 72 (2016) 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2016.06.006.
• G. Li, H. Tan, X. He, J. Zhang, X. Deng, Z. Zheng, “Research on the properties of wet-ground waste limestone powder as foam stabilizer in foamed concrete,” Constr. Build. Mater., 329 (2022) 127203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127203.
• E. K. K. Nambiar, K. Ramamurthy, “Models for strength prediction of foam concrete,” Mater. Struct. Constr., 41 (2008) 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-007-9234-0 .