Abstract

This work examines the development of an environmentally friendly one-part geopolymer concrete suitable for extrusion-based 3D printing. A total of 27 mixtures were analyzed by systematically varying precursor blends (ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) and fly ash), aggregate-to-binder ratios, and powdered activator contents. A qualitative "bucket test" was evaluated as a potentially site-friendly consistency-screening technique and showed good agreement with flow-table observations. Within the investigated material and printing conditions, a candidate printability window was associated with zero slump and a slump-flow diameter of 140–180 mm. To balance pumpability with structural build-up, the reduction in slump flow after a 10 min rest period was typically 10–15 mm for the Type-II candidate mixtures. Among the six Type-II candidates, CM-12 (50% GGBS, aggregate-to-binder ratio 1.5, and 10% activator) showed the best overall extrusion and shape-retention response and was used to print a continuous 12-layer object. Printing reduced density by 3.48–8.01% relative to mold casting, while the printed specimens showed a direction-dependent compressive response; no claim of statistically significant anisotropy is made from the available replicate set. The mold-cast mixtures developed 28-day compressive strengths of 32.7–41.29 MPa. The findings support the bucket test as a rapid preliminary screening method rather than a stand-alone predictor of successful printing. Further validation across materials, environmental conditions, and printer configurations is required before the numerical limits can be used as general site-control criteria.

Keywords

Geopolymer Concrete, 3D Printing, Printability, Mix Consistency, Flow Assessment, Compressive Strength,

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. G. Anand, T.N. Tharunkumar, Review on partial replacement of cement in concrete by using waste materials. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 1(6), (2019) 526-531. https://doi.org/10.34256/irjmtcon76
  2. H. Zhong, M. Zhang, 3D printing geopolymers: A review. Cement and Concrete Composites, 128, (2022) 104455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2022.104455
  3. R. Ranjith, P. Easwaran, M. Kalaivani, S. Ramesh, Strength and Structural Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with Natural Fibers—A Review. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 1, (2019) 432–438. https://doi.org/10.34256/irjmtcon60
  4. A. Vinothkumar, M. Kalaivani, P. Easwaran, Development of fly ash GGBS based self compacting geopolymer concrete: A review. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 1(6), (2019) 373–377. https://doi.org/10.34256/irjmtcon49
  5. C. Roux, J. Archez, C. Le Gall, M. Saadé, A. Féraille, J.-F. Caron, Towards sustainable material: optimizing geopolymer mortar formulations for 3D printing: a life cycle assessment approach. Sustainability, 16(8), (2024) 3328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083328
  6. B. Panda, S.C. Paul, L.J. Hui, Y.W.D. Tay, M.J. Tan, Additive manufacturing of geopolymer for sustainable built environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, (2017) 281–288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.165
  7. S.H. Bong, M. Xia, B. Nematollahi, C. Shi, Ambient temperature cured ‘just-add-water’ geopolymer for 3D concrete printing applications. Cement and Concrete Composites, 121, (2021) 104060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104060
  8. K. Avinash Varma, K.S. Chundury, B. Narendra Kumar, A Review on Application of 3D Printing Principles in Infrastructure Industry and its Impact on Evolution of the Industry. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 4(4), (2022) 1–7. https://doi.org/10.54392/irjmt2241
  9. M. Priyadharshini, S.S. Chelladurai, Best Mix Ratio for Concrete Printing using Localised Materials. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 2(3), (2020) 22–26. https://doi.org/10.34256/irjmt2034
  10. T.D. Ngo, A. Kashani, G. Imbalzano, K.T. Nguyen, D. Hui, Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Composites Part B: Engineering, 143, (2018) 172–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012
  11. P. Barve, A. Bahrami, S. Shah, A Comprehensive Review on Effects of Material Composition, Mix Design, and Mixing Regimes on Rheology of 3D-Printed Geopolymer Concrete. The Open Construction & Building Technology Journal, 18, (2024). https://doi.org/10.2174/0118748368292859240313061706
  12. D. Sharma, R.B. Singh, A. Gupta, A State-Of-The-Art Review on Development and Properties of One-Part Geopolymer Materials. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2025(1), (2025) 8856426. https://doi.org/10.1155/adce/8856426
  13. B. Panda, C. Unluer, M.J. Tan, Investigation of the rheology and strength of geopolymer mixtures for extrusion-based 3D printing. Cement and Concrete Composites, 94, (2018) 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.10.002
  14. D. Sun, J. Lee, A. Mohyeddin, J. Migunthanna, Mechanical Properties and Reproducibility of One-Part Ambient-Cured Slag and Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete. Buildings, 16(4), (2026) 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings16040707
  15. J. Ren, H. Sun, Q. Li, Z. Li, L. Ling, X. Zhang, Y. Wang, F. Xing, Experimental comparisons between one-part and normal (two-part) alkali-activated slag binders. Construction and Building Materials, 309, (2021) 125177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125177
  16. B. Nematollahi, J. Sanjayan, F.U.A. Shaikh, Synthesis of heat and ambient cured one-part geopolymer mixes with different grades of sodium silicate. Ceramics International, 41(4), (2015) 5696–5704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.12.154
  17. A. Kul, O. Kocaer, A. Aldemir, G. Yildirim, S.S. Lucas, 3D printable one-part alkali-activated mortar derived from brick masonry wastes. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 21, (2024) e04081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e04081
  18. G. Ma, Y. Yan, M. Zhang, J. Sanjayan, Effect of steel slag on 3D concrete printing of geopolymer with quaternary binders. Ceramics International, 48(18), (2022) 26233–26247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.05.305
  19. Y.A. Al-Noaimat, S.H. Ghaffar, M. Chougan, M.J. Al-Kheetan, A review of 3D printing low-carbon concrete with one-part geopolymer: Engineering, environmental and economic feasibility. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 18, (2023) e01818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01818
  20. S. Muthukrishnan, S. Ramakrishnan, J. Sanjayan, Effect of alkali reactions on the rheology of one-part 3D printable geopolymer concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, 116, (2021) 103899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.103899
  21. B. Panda, G.B. Singh, C. Unluer, M.J. Tan, Synthesis and characterization of one-part geopolymers for extrusion-based 3D concrete printing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, (2019) 610–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.185
  22. B. Nematollahi, S.H. Bong, M. Xia, J. Sanjayan, Digital Fabrication of ‘Just-Add-Water’ Geopolymers: Effects of Curing Condition and Print-Time Interval. In: Bos, F., Lucas, S., Wolfs, R., Salet, T. (eds) Second RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication. DC 2020. RILEM Bookseries, Springer, Cham, 28, (2020) 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49916-7_10
  23. B. Nematollahi, M. Xia, S.H. Bong, J. Sanjayan, Hardened Properties of 3D Printable ‘One-Part’ Geopolymer for Construction Applications. In: Wangler, T., Flatt, R. (eds) First RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication – Digital Concrete 2018. DC 2018. RILEM Bookseries, Springer, Cham, 19, (2018) 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99519-9_17
  24. Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, G. Liu, Y. Yang, M. Wu, B. Pang, Fresh properties of a novel 3D printing concrete ink. Construction and Building Materials, 174, (2018) 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.04.115
  25. O.H. Wallevik, D. Feys, J.E. Wallevik, K.H. Khayat, Avoiding inaccurate interpretations of rheological measurements for cement-based materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 78, (2015) 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.05.003
  26. S.C. Figueiredo, C.R. Rodríguez, Z.Y. Ahmed, D.H. Bos, Y. Xu, T.M. Salet, O. Çopuroğlu, E. Schlangen, F.P. Bos, An approach to develop printable strain hardening cementitious composites. Materials & Design, 169, (2019) 107651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107651
  27. S.H. Bong, B. Nematollahi, A. Nazari, M. Xia, J. Sanjayan, Efficiency of different superplasticizers and retarders on properties of ‘One-Part’ Fly ash-slag blended geopolymers with different activators. Materials, 12(20), (2019) 3410. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12203410
  28. K. Pasupathy, S. Ramakrishnan, J. Sanjayan, 3D concrete printing of eco-friendly geopolymer containing brick waste. Cement and Concrete Composites, 138, (2023) 104943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2023.104943
  29. J. Hou, X. Zhang, C. Zhang, J. Wang, P. Zheng, J. Huang, S. Feng, J. Wang, G. Duan, Adjusting the early rheology of alkali-activated slag by sodium silicate. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 21, (2024) e03995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03995
  30. Y. Sun, M.K. Mohan, X. Dai, Y. Zhang, G. Ye, G. De Schutter, Effects of mixing conditions and activator anionic species on the rheology of silicate-activated slag concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, 150, (2024) 105556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2024.105556
  31. P. Sahoo, S. Gupta, 3D printable earth-based alkali activated “ink”: effect of alkali concentration and binder-to-aggregate ratio. Journal of Building Engineering, 98, (2024) 111208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.111208
  32. J. Davidovits, (2008). Geopolymer chemistry and applications, 5th ed. Geopolymer Institute. https://www.geopolymer.org/learning/book-geopolymer-chemistry-and-applications/
  33. P. Barve, A. Bahrami, S. Shah, Geopolymer 3D printing: a comprehensive review on rheological and structural performance assessment, printing process parameters, and microstructure. Frontiers in Materials, 10, (2023) 1241869. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2023.1241869
  34. S. Hou, Z. Duan, J. Xiao, J. Ye, A review of 3D printed concrete: Performance requirements, testing measurements and mix design. Construction and Building Materials, 273, (2021) 121745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121745
  35. Y.A. Al-Noaimat, M. Chougan, A. Albar, S. Skibicki, K. Federowicz, M. Hoffman, D. Sibera, K. Cendrowski, M. Techman, J.N. Pacheco, S.Y. Chung, P. Sikora, M. Al-Kheetan, S.H. Ghaffar, Recycled brick aggregates in one-part alkali-activated materials: Impact on 3D printing performance and material properties. Developments in the Built Environment, 16, (2023) 100248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100248
  36. Y.W.D. Tay, Y. Qian, M.J. Tan, Printability region for 3D concrete printing using slump and slump flow test. Composites Part B: Engineering, 174, (2019) 106968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.106968
  37. E. Kamseu, V. Alzari, D. Nuvoli, D. Sanna, I. Lancellotti, A. Mariani, C. Leonelli, Dependence of the geopolymerization process and end-products to the nature of solid precursors: Challenge of the sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 278, (2021) 123587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123587
  38. J. Yang, G. Zhai, X. He, Y. Tang, Y. Su, X. Yu, J. Zeng, F. Wang, Properties and microstructure of a low-carbon clinker-free cementitious binder and its extrusion-based printing performance. Journal of Building Engineering, 90, (2024) 109483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109483
  39. Q. Yuan, C. Gao, T. Huang, S. Zuo, H. Yao, K. Zhang, Y. Huang, J. Liu, Factors influencing the properties of extrusion-based 3D-printed alkali-activated fly ash-slag mortar. Materials, 15(5), (2022) 1969. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15051969
  40. F.A. Shilar, S.V. Ganachari, V.B. Patil, T.Y. Khan, S. Javed, R.U. Baig, Optimization of alkaline activator on the strength properties of geopolymer concrete. Polymers, 14(12), (2022) 2434. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14122434
  41. O.A. Mohamed, R. Al Khattab, W. Al Hawat, Effect of relative GGBS/fly contents and alkaline solution concentration on compressive strength development of geopolymer mortars subjected to sulfuric acid. Scientific Reports, 12(1), (2022) 5634. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09682-z
  42. M. Samudrala, S. Mujeeb, B.A. Lanjewar, R. Chippagiri, M. Kamath, R.V. Ralegaonkar, 3D-Printable Concrete for Energy-Efficient Buildings. Energies, 16(10), (2023) 4234. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16104234
  43. L. Zhu, M. Zhang, Y. Zhang, J. Yao, G. Yang, X. Guan, Y. Zhao, Research progress on shrinkage properties of extruded 3D printed cement-based materials. Journal of Building Engineering, 77, (2023) 107394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107394
  44. P. Sikora, M. Techman, K. Federowicz, A.M. El-Khayatt, H.A. Saudi, M. Abd Elrahman, M. Hoffmann, D. Stephan, S.-Y. Chung, Insight into the microstructural and durability characteristics of 3D printed concrete: Cast versus printed specimens. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 17, (2022) e01320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01320
  45. A. Das, Y. Song, S. Mantellato, T. Wangler, D.A. Lange, R.J. Flatt, Effect of processing on the air void system of 3D printed concrete. Cement and concrete research, 156, (2022) 106789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2022.106789
  46. Z. Zhou, J. Geng, C. Jin, G. Liu, Z. Xia, Influence of Residue Soil on the Properties of Fly Ash–Slag-Based Geopolymer Materials for 3D Printing. Materials, 17(12), (2024) 2992. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17122992
  47. M. Elzeadani, D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, One part alkali activated materials: A state-of-the-art review. Journal of Building Engineering, 57, (2022) 104871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104871
  48. G. Gaurav, S.C. Kandpal, D. Mishra, N. Kotoky, A comprehensive review on fly ash-based geopolymer: a pathway for sustainable future. Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials, 13(1), (2024) 100–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650373.2023.2258122
  49. M. Gurunandan, H.J. Malla, P. Nanthagopalan, Effect of water to binder, aggregate to binder ratio and admixtures on printability and mechanical properties of 3D printable mortar mixtures. Journal of Building Engineering, 99, (2025) 111649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.111649
  50. S.C. Paul, Y.W.D. Tay, B. Panda, M.J. Tan, Fresh and hardened properties of 3D printable cementitious materials for building and construction. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 18(1), (2018) 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2017.02.008
  51. J.-C. Xue, W.-C. Wang, M.-G. Lee, C.-Y. Huang, C.-Y. Liang, Effect of aggregate-to-binder ratio on 3D printed concrete: printability, mechanics, and shrinkage. Materials and Structures, 59(1), (2026) 14. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-025-02866-9