Strength Development and Dimensional Stability of Lightweight Foamed Concrete with 75% Slag Replacement
Siong Kang Lim, Yee Ling Lee*, Peng Sung Loo, Siaw Yah Chong and Ming Han Lim* Author for corresponding; e-mail address: yllee@utar.edu.my
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3151-4656
Volume: Vol.53 No.3 (May 2026)
Content
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12982/CMJS.2026.053
Received: 14 November 2025, Revised: 6 April 2026, Accepted: 8 April 2026, Published: 20 May 2026
Citation: Lim S.K., Lee Y.L., Loo P.S., Chong S.Y. and Lim M.H., Strength development and dimensional stability of lightweight foamed concrete with 75% slag replacement. Chiang Mai Journal of Science, 2026; 53(3): e2026053. DOI 10.12982/CMJS.2026.053.
Graphical Abstract
Abstract
Lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) is a specialized concrete incorporating a foaming agent to increase the mixture volume while reducing overall density. Prior research indicates that incorporating ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) at optimal levels (40 to 60%) as a partial cement replacement can enhance various engineering properties of concrete, but limited study on strength development and dimensional stability for slag-based concrete at higher replacement level. This study aims to evaluate the engineering performance specifically compressive strength, flexural strength, and dimensional stability of high-volume slag-based lightweight foamed concrete. The influence of different curing conditions on these properties was also examined. Although GGBFS has been shown to improve long-term strength, the results reveal that a 75% slag replacement exceeds the optimal level, with lower compressive and flexural strengths compared to the 100% cement control mix at both early and later curing stages. Among the three curing conditions tested, water curing proved most effective, yielding consistent strength gains over time. Dimensional stability was also enhanced in the 75% slag mix compared to the control mix, suggesting better long-term durability performance in this regard. Compressive strength tests conducted on cube specimens confirmed that, despite reduced early-age strength, the 75% slag mix maintained values within acceptable limits for non-structural applications complied with MS 76. This study underscores the viability of high-volume slag substitution as a sustainable approach to reduce cement usage while maintaining functional performance in lightweight foamed concrete.
1. INTRODUCTION
Lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) is a cement-based material characterized by a highly cellular microstructure with stable air voids, which significantly lower its density while improving thermal and acoustic insulation. Its densities typically range from ultra-light (~100–300 kg/m³) to medium (~800–1200 kg/m³), making it useful for various non-structural and semi-structural application. Owing to its low self-weight, LFC simplifies handling and transport and substantially reduces the dead load on structures, yielding both economic and environmental advantages [1-2]. For example, Liu et al. [2] note that LFC is frequently used to manufacture lightweight blocks, sandwich panels, facades, wall sheets, and floor slabs. Additional applications include trench reinstatement, soil stabilization, and road sub-base fill. In all these uses, the reduced density of LFC reduces the material volume and structural demands, thereby enabling material savings and lower CO₂ emissions compared to conventional concrete [1-2].
To mitigate the large carbon footprint of ordinary Portland cement (OPC), modern concrete mixes increasingly incorporate supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) such as fly ash, silica fume, metakaolin, ceramic tile waste, eggshell powder, rice husk-bark ash, bagasse ash, calcined clay, limestone, palm oil fuel ash and particularly ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBFS) [1,3-10]. Replacing a portion of OPC with GGBFS can greatly reduce cement consumption and the associated CO₂ emissions, since GGBFS is a by-product of iron production that would otherwise be waste [1&8] Moreover, these SCMs often enhance concrete properties: the latent hydraulic and pozzolanic reactions of GGBFS yield additional calcium–silicate–hydrate (C–S–H) gel, which refines the pore structure and typically improves long-term strength and durability. In practice, incorporating GGBFS in concrete has been shown to improve workability and mechanical performance, reduce permeability, and increase resistance to aggressive agents, for example, reducing chloride ion ingress and sulfate attack compared to pure OPC concrete [11-12].
Specifically, GGBFS tends to slow the rate of early hydration and lower the heat of hydration in cementitious mixes, which can reduce thermal cracking in large pours [3]. Its finer particles also help “fill in” voids in the matrix, leading to a denser microstructure with fewer capillary pores [3, 12]. These effects combine to enhance durability: GGBFS concretes often exhibit significantly lower permeability and water absorption, and their chloride diffusion resistance improves over time as latent hydration creates more C–S–H gel that binds chlorides [11-12]. Field and laboratory studies consistently report that up to moderate replacement levels (typically 40–60%), GGBFS can maintain or even improve long-term compressive strength while markedly enhancing durability [3,11]. Conversely, extremely high GGBFS contents may reduce early strength, therefore mix design must be optimized for each application.
High ambient temperatures, as found in tropical and subtropical climates, can accelerate the hydration of slag-cement systems. Shumuye et al. [13] observed that slag-blended concretes cured at elevated temperature developed strength faster than those cured at 20 °C, owing to the temperature dependence of the slag reaction [13]. In practice, tropical humidity can also influence moisture retention and curing, but with appropriate curing it has been shown that slag-containing mixes in warm climates still reach competitive strength and durability levels over time [12-13]. Thus, slag-modified concretes are considered viable even under hot, humid conditions, provided adequate curing is maintained.
Given its low density and enhanced properties, slag containing LFC is an attractive sustainable material for lightweight construction. By replacing high volumes of cement with GGBFS, these foamed concretes can achieve a very low embodied carbon footprint while still meeting structural requirements. For instance, recent research has demonstrated that concrete with up to 40–60% GGBFS can achieve equal or better long-term strength and durability than OPC concrete [11]. The present study extends this concept by examining an LFC mix with 75% of the cement replaced by GGBFS. This study focuses on the early and long-term compressive strength development and dimensional stability (shrinkage/swelling) under different curing regimes, to assess whether such a high-slag replacement LFC mix can maintain adequate performance. This investigation is particularly relevant for tropical regions like Southeast Asia, where reducing cement usage is highly desirable. By exploring the structural viability and environmental benefits of the high-volume slag based LFC, this work contributes to the design of greener concrete composites suitable for modern construction needs.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
This section describes raw materials preparation, mixing and curing procedure, methodology for compression and flexural tests, and dimensional stability measurement of lightweight foamed concrete samples.
2.1 Raw Materials Preparation
The raw materials used in this research including cements, GGBFS, sand, tap water and local synthetic foaming agent. Locally produced Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) of grade 42.5N, conforming to MS 522: Part 1 [14] and ASTM C150 [15] standards, was used in this study. Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS) was sourced from YTL Cement and met the specifications outlined in ASTM C989 [16]. According to Zhao et al. [17], the chemical composition of the GGBFS included 32.5% reactive silicate (SiO₂) and 42.9% calcium oxide (CaO), confirming that it exhibits both pozzolanic and cementitious properties. Table 1 shows the chemical compositions of cement and GGBFS used in this study. The tested slag activity index is 100 as shown in Table 2, indicating high reactivity.
Quartz sand passing through a 600 µm sieve was used as fine aggregate. The sand was initially oven-dried at a temperature of 105 ± 5 °C, then sieved accordingly. It complied with ASTM C778 [18] requirements, and the fineness modulus was determined to be 3.32. The sand used is passed with the grading and quality for use in concrete as stated in ASTM C33 [19].
Tap water meeting the requirements of ASTM C1602/C1602M [20] was used throughout the casting and curing processes.
The stable foam used in this research was generated using a locally sourced synthetic foaming agent which is a blend of polyoxyethylene alkyl ether sulfate with a specific gravity of 1.03, in combination with a foaming generator. The light dark brown liquid foaming agent was diluted with water at a volumetric ratio of 1:30 (foaming agent to water) to produce the stable foam. The foaming generator served as the mechanism for converting the liquid solution into stable foam. The resulting foam had a density of 45 ± 5 kg/m³.
2.2 Mixing and Curing Procedure
The production of lightweight foamed concrete began with calculating the required weights of sand, cement, GGBFS, and water based on the target volume and desired density. The sand, cement, and GGBFS were weighed and thoroughly mixed in an electrically operated drum mixer for approximately 3–5 minutes. Water was then added to the dry mixture and mixed for an additional 5 minutes, or until a homogeneous cement mortar slurry was achieved. Foam was generated using a foam generator and gradually introduced into the slurry while mixing continued until a uniform consistency was obtained. The fresh mix was then tested for density using a 1-liter cone. Additional foam was added incrementally until the desired fresh density of 1300 ± 50 kg/m3 was reached. Finally, the foamed concrete mix was poured into moulds without any compaction or vibration. Table 3 shows the mix proportions of 100% cement mix and 75% slag based lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) respectively. The cementitious binder to sand ratio was fixed at 1: 1.5, and the water to cement ratio was fixed at 0.5 for comparison purpose.
One day after casting, the cube, prism, and block specimens were demoulded and placed in different environments corresponding to three distinct curing conditions: water curing, air curing, and natural weathering. The effects of these curing conditions were evaluated based on the performance of the specimens.
For water curing, the specimens were fully submerged in a water tank to maintain 100% relative humidity and a consistently 25 ± 2 0C. In the case of air curing, the specimens were stored in a laboratory with room temperature of 28 ± 2 0C, and consistent humidity of 65 ± 5% relative humidity. For natural tropical weathering, the specimens were placed under outdoor tropical weathering, where they were exposed to fluctuating environmental conditions, including variable humidity i.e. 60 ± 10% (non-raining) and 90 ± 5% (raining), and temperature i.e. 32 ± 2 0C (non-raining) and 26 ± 2 0C (raining).
2.3 Compression Test
The compression test conducted is complied with the standard of BS EN 12390-3 [21] for cubic sample. The 100 x 100 x 100 mm concrete cube samples were cured for 7, 28, 56 and 90 days under three different curing regimes, and subsequently the compression test were performed. The results were taken as average of triplicate.
2.4 Flexural Test
Flexural strength, also known as the modulus of rupture, is a key mechanical property of concrete that defines its ability to resist deformation under load. This parameter is particularly useful for estimating the load at which cracking may begin to develop in a concrete element. In this study, the flexural strength specimens were prism-shaped with dimensions of 40 × 40 × 160 mm. The tests were conducted using an Instron universal testing machine in accordance with the ASTM C293 [22]. The results were taken as average of triplicate.
2.5 Dimensional Stability Measurement
The dimensional stability specimens measured 100 mm × 200 mm × 400 mm. A setting-out bar was used to position pre-drilled stainless-steel discs, which were affixed to the specimens using a suitable epoxy adhesive. Each time a reading was required, the conical points of the dial gauge were inserted into the holes in the discs, and the dial reading was recorded. In this manner, strain changes in the specimen were translated into variations in the dial gauge reading [23]. The readings were stop recorded after the average shrinkage of the three concrete surfaces as shown in Figure 1(a) reached a maximum difference of 0.1% under air curing condition compared to the previous readings.
The study of dimensional stability was conducted under two curing conditions: air curing and natural tropical weathering. The strain of lightweight foamed concrete, whether shrinkage or expansion, was calculated using the Equation (1):
Strain, ε = different of strain gauge reading x strain factor of 1.587 x 10-5 (1)
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section shows results of compressive and flexural strengths, and dimensional stability of LFC samples. The results were discussed and justified accordingly.
3.1 Effect of Prolonged Curing Conditions on Compressive Development
Figure 2 illustrate the compressive strength development of lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) with 75% slag replacement and 100% cement (control) mixes over 7, 14, 28, 56, and 90 days under three curing regimes: water, air, and natural weathering. Across both mixes, water curing consistently produced the highest compressive strengths, underscoring its crucial role in promoting hydration and strength development. This effect was particularly pronounced in the slag-based mix, as ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) requires sustained moisture to activate its latent hydraulic and pozzolanic reactivity [35-36]. Under water curing, the slag mix exhibited a gradual yet continuous strength increases from 1.44 MPa at 7 days to 2.00 Mpa at 90 days. This trend is consistent with the slower reactivity of GGBFS, which extends the hydration window beyond that of ordinary Portland cement (OPC).
In contrast, the control mix demonstrated rapid early-age strength development, with compressive strength plateauing after 28 days, indicating the near-completion of hydration within the first month. Under air curing, both mixes showed significantly lower strength gains, with early dehydration limiting continued hydration. The slag mix exhibited minimal improvement between 28 and 90 days, and even a slight decline from 1.60 Mpa to 1.59 Mpa between 28 and 56 days, while the control mix showed only modest increases. Natural weathering produced intermediate results but demonstrated a more favourable long-term growth trajectory for the slag mix than the control mix. Notably, the slag mix achieved the highest compressive strength (2.10 Mpa) under natural weathering by 90 days, starting from the lowest value (1.31 Mpa at 7 days). This suggests that intermittent moisture exposure, such as rainfall and humidity cycles, can foster continued hydration in LFC systems.
A key observation is the crossover behaviour under water curing: by 56 days, the 75% slag mix surpassed the air-cured OPC mix in compressive strength. This finding highlights the pivotal role of curing in unlocking the performance of SCM-rich systems. As supported by Vishavkarma and Harish [24], slag-enhanced LFC develops additional calcium silicate hydrate (C–S–H) over time, improving strength and durability. Moisture availability is directly linked to the degree of slag activation, which contributes to densification and strength gain [25]. Due to the high porosity of LFC, this sensitivity to curing conditions is further amplified. Effective curing has also been shown to promote cement hydration and microstructural refinement, enhancing long-term durability [24].
Table 4 quantitatively reinforces these trends by comparing the strength of the slag mix as a percentage of the control mix at 28, 56, and 90 days. At 28 days, the slag mix retained 63.6% (water), 69.0% (air), and 63.0% (natural weathering) of the control mix’s strength. Although the strength dipped at 56 days for water and air curing (60.7% and 61.4%, respectively), it increased under natural weathering to 65.3%. By 90 days, the slag mix improved further to 62.1% (water), 65.9% (air), and 73.9% (natural weathering). This indicates that prolonged exposure to ambient humidity and moisture cycling can significantly enhance internal curing and pozzolanic activity in high-slag LFC. These results are consistent with previous findings that GGBFS-blended concretes experience delayed but sustained strength development due to time-dependent pozzolanic reactions with calcium hydroxide [26].
This long-term hydration trend is also corroborated by Lim et al. [27], who observed that self-compacting mortar with 40–60% slag replacement continued to gain strength up to 270 days under water curing, while the 100% cement mortar exhibited a decline in strength beyond 180 days. This behaviour aligns well with the performance of the 75% slag LFC observed in this study, where strength continued to increase up to 180 days, suggesting that slag-based systems benefit more from prolonged curing and remain chemically active well beyond the typical 28-day benchmark.
From a practical standpoint, the divergent strength development profiles have significant implications. OPC-based LFC is more suitable for applications requiring rapid strength gain, whereas slag-based LFC is ideal for projects prioritizing long-term durability and sustainability. Although early-age strength is compromised in high-slag systems, it can be addressed through optimized curing protocols or supplementary mix design strategies. Importantly, the observed performance under natural weathering suggests that field curing approaches, especially in humid environments, may be viable alternatives to water curing, reducing reliance on active curing systems [28].
Overall, the results affirm that 75% slag replacement in LFC is a viable and sustainable approach when supported by proper curing strategies. When allowed to develop under favourable moisture conditions, the slag-based mix can achieve long-term mechanical performance comparable to conventional OPC while offering substantial reductions in embodied carbon [29-30].
3.2 Flexural Strength
The flexural strength performance of lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) incorporating 75% ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) replacement exhibited significant dependence on the curing environment. As shown in Figure 3(a), the highest flexural strength for the 75% slag mix was recorded under water curing, reaching approximately 1.31 Mpa at 28 days. This value sharply declined to 0.97 Mpa under air curing and dropped further to 0.94 Mpa under natural weathering curing. This pronounced decline with approximately 28% reduction from water to natural weathering curing. This trend reflects the well-established requirement for sustained moisture to activate the latent hydraulic properties of slag, particularly in systems with high slag content. The pozzolanic reaction of GGBFS is significantly slower than that of Portland cement and is highly dependent on the availability of water. Inadequate hydration, such as that seen under air curing, limits calcium silicate hydrate (C–S–H) formation, leading to a weaker matrix and lower bending resistance. These findings are consistent with prior studies reporting improved mechanical performance in GGBFS-modified foamed concrete only when sufficient curing is provided [31-32].
In contrast, the 100% cement mix as shown in Figure 3(b) displayed a more robust and stable performance across the curing regimes. The water-cured cement mix attained a peak flexural strength of around 1.61 Mpa, with air and natural weathering curing yielding 1.13 Mpa and 1.20 Mpa, respectively at 28-days. While water curing again led to the highest flexural values, the gap between curing types was narrower than that observed in the slag-based samples. This behaviour is attributed to the more robust and rapid hydration of Portland cement, which allows for early-age strength gain even under suboptimal curing environments. The results suggest that cement-only LFC mixes may exhibit greater consistency in field applications where ideal curing may not always be achievable. However, this comes at the expense of sustainability and long-term shrinkage control.
Table 5 presents the flexural strength development of lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) incorporating 75% slag replacement in comparison to a 100% cement control mix over 28-, 56-, and 90-day curing periods under water, air, and natural weathering conditions. At 28 days, the slag mix achieved 81.4% (water), 85.8% (air), and 78.3% (natural weathering) of the control mix’s flexural strength. By 90 days, flexural strength slightly improved under water curing to 82.6%, remained stable under air curing at 85.7%, and showed a slight decrease under natural weathering to 71.9%. These results indicate that while the flexural strength of the slag mix remains consistently lower than that of the control mix, the differences are relatively moderate, particularly under air and water curing. The highest performance was observed under air curing across all ages, possibly due to surface densification in the absence of excess moisture, which may enhance early-age tensile bond strength. In contrast, natural weathering produced the lowest flexural strength values at all curing ages, likely due to fluctuating moisture and temperature conditions that may hinder early microstructural development and increase the risk of surface microcracking. Notably, strength recovery was evident under both water and air curing by 90 days, reflecting the prolonged pozzolanic activity of GGBFS, which contributes to matrix refinement and improved interfacial bonding. These findings suggest that although high slag content may reduce early-age tensile performance, it can still achieve acceptable long-term flexural strength, particularly under stable curing conditions. This supports the potential of slag-based LFC as a sustainable alternative for applications requiring moderate tensile performance, provided that appropriate curing strategies are employed.
Figure 4 present the correlation between flexural and compressive strength for the slag-based and cement-only LFC mixes, respectively. In the 75% slag mix as shown in Figure 4(a), Natural weathering-cured samples demonstrated a strong positive correlation with showing the 1.0 of R2 between compressive and flexural strength, suggesting that optimal hydration fosters a structurally integrated matrix capable of resisting both axial and flexural loads. However, deviations from this trend were observed in air-cured samples, where flexural strength lagged behind compressive strength, possibly due to internal microcracking caused by early-age drying or an underdeveloped interfacial transition zone. Water curing offered intermediate performance, supporting partial hydration but not to the extent of the more consistent outcomes seen under air curing in this case. This decoupling effect under insufficient curing has been reported in slag-rich systems, where underdeveloped pozzolanic networks hinder cohesive mechanical behaviour [11].
The 100% cement mix as shown in Figure 4(b), in comparison, showed a non-linear relationship between compressive and flexural strength, with R² values above 0.97 across all curing types. A second-order polynomial fitting was adopted to better capture this trend, as reflected by the higher correlation coefficients (R²) and the linear fitting was found to be less representative of the experimental data. This suggests a more uniform and predictable relationship, with strength points tightly clustered along a consistent slope regardless of the curing regime. The non-linear behaviour may be attributed to variations in microstructural development and pore structure, which influence the interaction between compressive and flexural performance. The quadratic term reflects the curvature of the empirical relationship rather than representing a direct physical parameter. Similar study from Kursuncu et al. [37] state their RSM “design model is implemented as Quadratic” and provide quadratic model equations for compressive strength and flexural strength, demonstrating accepted use of second‑order polynomial forms to represent strength data. Such behaviour enhances the reliability of estimating flexural performance from compressive strength in practical design scenarios. However, this mix lacks the long-term sustainability and dimensional stability benefits offered by high slag content mixes.
3.3 Dimensional Stability
Figure 5 illustrates the dimensional change behaviour of lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) samples incorporating 75% slag replacement (S75) and 100% cement (C100) under two curing conditions, natural weathering and air curing. Comparing the S75 mix under natural weathering (S75NW) with its air-cured counterpart (S75 Air), it is evident that natural weathering significantly reduced shrinkage. The S75NW sample stabilized around -0.02, while S75 Air continued to shrink to nearly -0.60 over the same period at 56 days. These 0.58 reductions in shrinkage highlights the critical role of external moisture in activating the latent hydraulic properties of GGBFS. Natural weathering likely allowed intermittent hydration and slower moisture loss, which promoted continued pozzolanic reaction and internal curing, both essential for dimensional stability in slag-rich systems.
In comparison, the 100% cement mix under natural weathering (C100NW) versus air curing (C100 Air) showed a similar trend, though with less pronounced shrinkage control. C100NW reached about 0.16 expansion at day 56, while C100 Air approached -0.71, representing a 0.87 reduction due to the harsher drying condition. Unlike the slag mix, the cement-only system lacked prolonged hydration capability and was more prone to autogenous and drying shrinkage, particularly in air-curing environments where the hydration process was prematurely interrupted. The result indicates that even though both mixes benefit from natural weathering, the cement-only mix remains more sensitive to water loss and internal stress development during early age.
When comparing S75NW with C100NW, the benefits of slag incorporation become most apparent. Despite being subjected to the same natural weathering condition, the slag-based sample (S75NW) exhibited markedly lower shrinkage than the cement-only sample (C100NW). Incorporating ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) into concrete significantly enhances dimensional stability and reduces shrinkage compared to cement-only mixtures. Recent studies have shown that GGBFS-blended concrete exhibits lower drying shrinkage, with the reduction becoming more pronounced as the replacement level of cement with GGBFS increases. This improvement is attributed to the lower heat of hydration and slower, more controlled reaction kinetics of GGBFS, which limit microcrack formation and volumetric deformation during curing. The extended reaction window provided by GGBFS facilitates gradual strength gain and contributes to more stable long-term dimensional behaviour, even under natural weathering conditions. These findings highlight the importance of GGBFS in producing durable, dimensionally stable concrete with reduced risk of early-age cracking and shrinkage-related damage [33-34].
For the comparison between the two air-cured samples, S75 Air and C100 Air, shows that even under the least favourable curing environment, the slag-based mix still outperforms the cement-only mix in shrinkage resistance. S75 Air reached around -0.74, whereas C100 Air recorded the highest shrinkage at -0.76, indicating a 2.7% reduction in total deformation for the slag-based system. This finding suggests that the improved dimensional stability of the GGBFS mix is associated with its enhanced internal curing capacity, which is attributed to its refined pore structure and lower heat of hydration [33-34]. The incorporation of GGBFS leads to the formation of a denser microstructure with reduced capillary pore size and connectivity, thereby limiting moisture evaporation and internal drying. This pore refinement helps retain water within the matrix, promoting continued hydration and reducing autogenous and drying shrinkage. Furthermore, the lower heat of hydration of GGBFS results in reduced temperature rise during early-age reactions, minimizing thermal gradients and associated microcracking. The combined effects of moisture retention and reduced thermal stress contribute to improved dimensional stability, even under limited external curing conditions [11,12,33,34]. In contrast, cement-only LFC is more prone to early drying and uncontrolled shrinkage, which poses a greater risk of microcracking and structural instability. The cement-only samples, particularly under air curing, displayed aggressive shrinkage likely due to rapid water evaporation and the absence of latent hydraulic reactions, which underscores the vulnerability of traditional cementitious foamed concretes to early-age deformation.
4. CONCLUSIONS
This study evaluated the performance of lightweight foamed concrete (LFC) with 75% ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) as cement replacement. Results confirm that high-volume slag incorporation offers environmental benefits while maintaining acceptable mechanical and dimensional performance for non-structural applications based on MS 76.
Although early-age strength of the slag mix was lower than the 100% cement mix, strength gain improved significantly over time, particularly under water and natural weathering curing. Notably, the slag mix achieved the highest compressive strength at 90 days under natural weathering, indicating its potential under passive curing in tropical climates.
Flexural strength and strength correlations highlighted the importance of proper curing, as performance degraded under air curing. Dimensional stability was improved in the slag mix across all curing regimes, demonstrating reduced shrinkage due to GGBFS’s slower hydration and refined pore structure.
Overall, high-volume slag LFC shows promise as a low-carbon, durable material for sustainable construction, provided appropriate curing practices are followed.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman for providing the necessary facilities and support, and Eco Greenbuild Industries Sdn Bhd for the funding contribution under project vote 8271/0001.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Siong Kang Lim: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Project administration. Yee Ling Lee: Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft. Peng Sung Loo: Resources, Funding acquisition. Siaw Yah Chong: Validation, Visualization. Ming Han Lim: Investigation, Writing - Review & Editing
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The authors declare that they hold no competing interests.
DECLARATION OF GENERATIVE AI IN PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPT
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used ChatGPT 5.1 to improve the readability and language of the manuscript. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as necessary and take(s) full responsibility for the publication's content.
FUNDING
This research was financially supported Eco Greenbuild Industries Sdn Bhd (Grant Number 8271/0001).
REFERENCES
[1] Mayhoub O., Ahmed M., Hossam M., Mohamed B., Sherif M. and Sayed S., A review on sustainable lightweight foamed concrete. Advanced Sciences and Technology Journal, 2025; 2(1): 1026. DOI 10.21608/astj.2025.345092.1026.
[2] Liu Y., Zhao Z., Amin M.N., Ahmed B., Khan K., Arifeen S.U., et al., Foam concrete for lightweight construction applications: A comprehensive review of the research development and material characteristics. Reviews on Advanced Materials Science, 2024; 63: 20240022. DOI 10.1515/rams-2024-0022.
[3] Ahmad J.., Kontoleon K.J., Majdi A., Naqash M.T., Deifalla A.F., Ben Kahla N., et al., A comprehensive review on the ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) in concrete production. Sustainability, 2022; 14(14): 8783. DOI 10.3390/su14148783.
[4] Lim S.K., Lee Y.L., Yew M.K., Ng W.W., Lee F.W., Kwong K.Z. and Lim J.H., Mechanical properties of lightweight foamed concrete with ceramic tile wastes as partial cement replacement material. Frontiers in Built Environment, 2022; 8: 836362. DOI 10.3389/fbuil.2022.836362.
[5] Lim S.K., Foo K.P., Lee F.W., Tiong H.Y., Lee Y.L., Lim J.H., et al., Acoustic properties of lightweight foamed concrete with eggshell waste as partial cement replacement material. Sains Malaysiana, 2021; 50(2): 537–547. DOI 10.17576/jsm-2021-5002-24.
[6] Tiong H.K., Lim S.K. and Lee Y.L., Dimensional stability of lightweight foamed concrete containing eggshell powder and calcium stearate. International Journal of Integrated Engineering, 2022; 14(1): 260–268.
[7] Lim M.H., Lim S.K., Lee Y.L., Lee K.Y. and Tiong H.Y., Bayesian-optimized deep learning for predicting compressive strength of sustainable eggshell foamed concrete. Global NEST Journal, 2024; 27(1): 1–18. DOI 10.30955/gnj.06759.
[8] Rukzon S. and Chindaprasirt P., Strength, chloride penetration and corrosion resistance of ternary blends of portland cement self-compacting concrete containing bagasse ash and rice husk-bark ash, Chiang Mai Journal of Science, 2018; 45(4): 1863-1874.
[9] Chaipanich A., Sansuthum N., Chomyen P., Wianglor K. and Aodkeng S., Phase formations, compressive strength and microstructure of environmentally friendly Thai Lopburi calcined clay-limestone cement mixes, Chiang Mai Journal of Science, 2024; 51(6): e2024089. DOI 10.12982/CMJS.2024.089.
[10] Rungruang S., Thepwong R., Chuphonsat A., Chaisakulkiet U., Rukzon S., Chotetanorm C., et al., Sustainable construction: Integrating palm oil fuel ash in mortar to enhance physical and durability properties, Chiang Mai Journal of Science, 2024; 51(6): e2024097. DOI 10.12982/CMJS.2024.097.
[11] Ghostine R., Bur N., Feugeas F. and Hoteit I., Curing effect on durability of cement mortar with GGBS: Experimental and numerical study. Materials, 2022; 15(13): 4394. DOI 10.3390/ma15134394.
[12] Yoon Y.S., Kwon S.J., Kim K.C., Kim Y., Koh K.T., Choi W.Y., et al., Evaluation of durability performance for chloride ingress considering long-term aged GGBFS and FA concrete and analysis of the relationship between concrete mixture characteristic and passed charge using machine learning algorithm. Materials, 2023; 16(23): 7459. DOI 10.3390/ma16237459.
[13] Shumuye E.D., Zhao J. and Wang Z., Effect of the curing condition and high-temperature exposure on ground-granulated blast-furnace slag cement concrete. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 2021; 15: 15. DOI 10.1186/s40069-020-00437-6.
[14] Department of Standards Malaysia, MS 522: Part 1:2003 Portland cement (ordinary and rapid-hardening): Part 1: specification. Department of Standards Malaysia, 2003.
[15] ASTM, ASTM C150/C150M-24: Standard specification for Portland cement. ASTM International, United States, 2024.
[16] ASTM, ASTM C989/C989M-18a: Standard specification for slag cement for use in concrete and mortars. ASTM International, United States, 2022.
[17] Zhao X., Lim S.K., Tan C.S., Li B., Ling T.C., Huang R., et al., Properties of foamed mortar prepared with granulated blast-furnace slag. Materials, 2015; 8(2): 462–473. DOI 10.3390/ma8020462.
[18] ASTM, ASTM C778-21: Standard specification for standard sand. ASTM International, United States, 2021.
[19] ASTM, ASTM C33/C33M-18: Standard specification for concrete aggregates. ASTM International, United States, 2023.
[20] ASTM, ASTM C1602/C1602M-22: Standard specification for mixing water used in the production of hydraulic cement concrete. ASTM International, United States, 2022.
[21] British Standards Institution, BS EN 12390-3:2019 Testing hardened concrete. Compressive strength of test specimens. British Standards Institution, London, 2019.
[22] ASTM, ASTM C293/C293M-16: Standard test method for flexural strength of concrete (using simple beam with center-point loading). ASTM International, United States, 2016.
[23] RILEM, Technical recommendations for the testing and use of construction materials: Measurement of shrinkage and swelling of concrete. RILEM CPC9, 1994; 28–29.
[24] Vishavkarma A. and Harish K.V., Development of eco-friendly and cost-effective foam concrete using high-volume supplementary cementitious materials: Analysis of microstructural, mechanical, and durability properties. Construction and Building Materials, 2024; 458: 139584. DOI 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.139584.
[25] Yigang L.v., Wang C., Han W., Li X. and Peng H., Study of the mechanical properties and microstructure of alkali-activated fly ash–slag composite cementitious materials. Polymers, 2023; 15(8): 1903. DOI 10.3390/polym15081903.
[26] Lee H.S., Wang X.Y., Zhang L.N. and Koh K.T., Analysis of the optimum usage of slag for the compressive strength of concrete. Materials, 2015; 8(3): 1213–1229. DOI 10.3390/ma8031213.
[27] Lim S.K., Ling T.C. and Hussin M.W., Strength properties of self-compacting mortar mixed with GGBFS. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Construction Materials, 2012; 165(CM2): 87–98. DOI 10.1680/coma.10.00016.
[28] Ortega J., Sánchez I., Cabeza M. and Climent M., Short-term behavior of slag concretes exposed to a real in situ Mediterranean climate environment. Materials, 2017; 10(8): 915. DOI 10.3390/ma10080915.
[29] Yao T., Tian Q., Zhang M., Qi S., Wang C. and Ruan M., Laboratory investigation of foamed concrete prepared by recycled waste concrete powder and ground granulated blast furnace slag. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023; 426: 139095. DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139095.
[30] Wang Z., Wu K., Liu S., Li M., Zhang X. and Yuan Z., Low-carbon foamed concrete based on alkali residue and GGBS versus conventional foamed concrete: Comparative experimental research. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2024; 37(1): 04024479. DOI 10.1061/jmcee7.mteng-18893.
[31] Lee N., Jeong Y., Kang H. and Moon J., Heat-induced acceleration of pozzolanic reaction under restrained conditions and consequent structural modification. Materials, 2020; 13(13): 2950. DOI 10.3390/ma13132950.
[32] Sajedi F. and Razak H.A., The effect of chemical activators on early strength of ordinary Portland cement-slag mortars. Construction and Building Materials, 2010; 24(10): 1944–1951. DOI 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.04.006.
[33] Zhang Y., Liu X., Xu Z., Yuan W., Xu Y., Yao Z., et al., Early-age cracking of fly ash and GGBFS concrete due to shrinkage, creep, and thermal effects: A review. Materials, 2024; 17(10): 2288. DOI 10.3390/ma17102288.
[34] Oh S., Kim J., Song C. and Choi S., Effects of fineness and substitution rate of GGBFS on material characteristics of GGBFS-blended cement mortars: Hydration, non-evaporable water, pore structure, mechanical properties, self-desiccation, and autogenous shrinkage. Journal of Building Engineering, 2024; 92: 109741. DOI 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109741.
[35] Kolani B., Buffo-Lacarrière L., Sellier A., Escadeillas G., Boutillon L. and Linger L., Hydration of slag-blended cements. Cement and Concrete Composites, 2012; 34(9): 1009–1018. DOI 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.05.007.
[36] Huang L., Tang L., Dong Z., Abdulahi B.A. and Yang Z., Effect of curing regimes on composition and microstructure of blended pastes: Insight into later-age hydration mechanism. Cement and Concrete Research, 2025; 189: 107785. DOI 10.1016/j.cemconres.2025.107785.
[37] Kursuncu B., Gencel O., Bayraktar O.Y., Shi J., Nematzadeh M. and Kaplan G., Optimization of foam concrete characteristics using response surface methodology and artificial neural networks. Construction and Building Materials, 2022; 337: 127575. DOI 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127575.
Related Articles
DOI: 10.12982/CMJS.2025.082.
Tzyy Lih Lee, Chun-Chieh Yip, Lloyd Ling, Kok Zee Kwong, Jing-Ying Wong and Foo Wei Lee
Vol.52 No.6 (November 2025)Research Article View: 793 Download: 420
DOI: 10.12982/CMJS.2024.089.
Arnon Chaipanich, Nalintip Sansuthum, Phakin Chomyen, Kornnika Wianglor and Supakporn Aodkeng
Vol.51 No.6 (November 2024)Research Article View: 1,689 Download: 343
DOI: 10.12982/CMJS.2023.062.
Jenjinta Punyasurb, Suthee Wattanasiriwech and Darunee Wattanasiriwech
Vol.50 No.6 (November 2023)Research Article View: 986 Download: 840
DOI: 10.12982/CMJS.2022.092.
Sudarat Issarapanacheewin, Klitsadee Yubonmhat, Thunyaras Akharawutchayanon, Umaporn Lamdab, Wipawe Silpradit, Wilasinee Kingkam, Witsanu Katekaew and Nikom Prasertchiewchan
Vol.49 No.5 (September 2022)Research Article View: 2,220 Download: 797
page: 1657 - 1678
Parinya Somrang, Anucha Wannagon, Pattarawan Choeycharoen, and Watcharee Sornlar
Vol.48 No.6 (November 2021)Research Article View: 1,889 Download: 505
page: 786 - 795
Suwanan Thammarong, Narumon Lertcumfu, Pharatree Jaita, Nuttaporn Pimpha, Tawee Tunkasiri, Gobwute Rujijanagul and Pruchya Malasri
Vol.47 No.4 (Special Issue II : July 2020)Research Article View: 1,202 Download: 571
page: 1855 - 1862
Nonthaphong Phonphuak and Prinya Chindaprasirt
Vol.45 No.4 (July 2018)Research Article View: 1,107 Download: 1,059
page: 1099 - 1110
Pat Sooksaen* and Pathompong Puathawee
Vol.45 No.2 (March 2018)Research Article View: 1,152 Download: 334