Electrical Conductivity and pH Tests for Rapid and Direct Assessment of Pozzolanic Reactivity
Source abstract
Abstract
This study investigates the effectiveness of rapid (6-h) pH and electrical conductivity measurements of a lime-pozzolan solution for direct assessment of reactivity during initial screening of pozzolanic materials. A new analytical method is proposed to estimate the consumed portlandite using electrical conductivity and pH measurements. Correlations between pH and electrical conductivity test outcomes (estimated portlandite consumption) and results of three other direct and indirect tests were determined using available data from seven different materials. The tested materials were brick powder (BP), dolostone powder (DS), class C fly ash (FA), waste glass powder (GP), lightweight aggregate fines (LA), pottery cull (PC), and silica fume (SF). Good correlation was found between the strength activity index (SAI) and the estimated portlandite consumption using electrical conductivity. Similarly, the consumed portlandite estimated using pH measurements had good correlations with thermographic analysis (TGA) and Frattini test results.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Building materials and conservation · Recycling and utilization of industrial and municipal waste in materials production
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Avet, F., Li, X., Ben Haha, M., Bernal, S. A., Bishnoi, S., Cizer, Ö., et al. (2022). Report of RILEM TC 267-TRM phase 2: Optimization and testing of the robustness of the R3 reactivity tests for supplementary cementitious materials. Materials and Structures. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01928-610.1617/s11527-022-01928-6 ↗
2. Black, L. (2016). Low clinker cement as a sustainable construction material. Sustainability of construction materials. Elsevier.
3. Borges, A. L., Soares, S. M., Freitas, T. O., Oliveira Júnior, A. D., Ferreira, E. B., & Ferreira, F. G. (2021). Evaluation of the pozzolanic activity of glass powder in three maximum grain sizes. Materials Research. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2020-049610.1590/1980-5373-mr-2020-0496 ↗
4. BS EN 196–5 (2011). BSI Standards Publication Methods of testing cement Part 5 : Pozzolanicity test for pozzolanic cement.
5. Carneiro, L. R. S., Garcia, D. C. S., Costa, M. C. F., Houmard, M., & Figueiredo, R. B. (2018). Evaluation of the pozzolanicity of nanostructured sol-gel silica and silica fume by electrical conductivity measurement. Construction and Building Materials, 160, 252–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.04210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.042 ↗
6. Choudhary, A., Bharadwaj, K., Ghantous, R. M., Isgor, O. B., & Weiss, W. J. (2022). Pozzolanic reactivity test of supplementary cementitious materials. ACI Materials Journal, 119(2), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.14359/5173434910.14359/51734349 ↗
7. de Azevedo Basto, P., Savastano, J. H., & de Melo Neto, A. A. (2019). Characterization and pozzolanic properties of sewage sludge ashes (SSA) by electrical conductivity. Cement and Concrete Composites, 104, Article 103410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.10341010.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.103410 ↗
8. Diaz-Loya, I., Juenger, M., Seraj, S., & Minkara, R. (2019). Extending supplementary cementitious material resources: Reclaimed and remediated fly ash and natural pozzolans. Cement and Concrete Composites, 101, 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.06.01110.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.06.011 ↗
9. Donatello, S., Tyrer, M., & Cheeseman, C. R. (2010). Comparison of test methods to assess pozzolanic activity. Cement and Concrete Composites, 32(2), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.10.00810.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.10.008 ↗
10. Elyasigorji, F. (2023). Reactivity Assessment of Pozzolanic Materials for Partial Replacement of Cement in Concrete. Doctoral Dissertation, 1–148. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/3141. Accessed 26 Dec 2023
11. Elyasigorji, F., Farajiani, F., Hajipour Manjili, M., Lin, Q., Elyasigorji, S., Farhangi, V., & Tabatabai, H. (2023). Comprehensive review of direct and indirect pozzolanic reactivity testing methods. Buildings, 13(11), Article 2789. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings1311278910.3390/buildings13112789 ↗
12. Elyasigorji, F., & Tabatabai, H. (2024a). Prediction of strength activity index using chemical and physical properties of pozzolans. CEMENT, 18, Article 100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMENT.2024.10011610.1016/J.CEMENT.2024.100116 ↗
13. Elyasigorji, F., & Tabatabai, H. (2024b). Assessment of select direct and indirect pozzolanic reactivity test outcomes with robust regression and ranking analysis. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 21, Article e03441. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CSCM.2024.E0344110.1016/J.CSCM.2024.E03441 ↗
14. Galí, S., Ayora, C., Alfonso, P., Tauler, E., & Labrador, M. (2001). Kinetics of dolomite–portlandite reaction: Application to portland cement concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 31(6), 933–939. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(01)00499-910.1016/S0008-8846(01)00499-9 ↗
15. Hayashi, M. (2004). Temperature-electrical conductivity relation of water for environmental monitoring and geophysical data inversion. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 96(1–3), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EMAS.0000031719.83065.6810.1023/B:EMAS.0000031719.83065.68 ↗
16. Jang, H., Lim, Y.-T., Kang, J.-H., So, S., & So, H. (2018). Influence of calcination and cooling conditions on pozzolanic reactivity of paper mill sludge. Construction and Building Materials, 166, 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.11910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.119 ↗
17. Jeon, D., Han, S., Jung, S., & Moon, J. (2025a). Hybrid machine learning framework for predicting pozzolanic reactivity: Integration of R3 test and GAN-augmented data. Construction and Building Materials, 485, Article 141959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14195910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.141959 ↗
18. Jeon, D., Jung, S., Lee, J., & Moon, J. (2025b). Investigating pozzolanic reactivity of ground ferronickel slag through the R3 test for its potential use as alternative supplementary cementitious material. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 19(1), Article 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-025-00832-x10.1186/s40069-025-00832-x ↗
19. Justnes, H., Escudero-Oñate, C., Garmo, Ø. A., & Mengede, M. (2020). Transformation kinetics of burnt lime in freshwater and sea water. Materials, 13(21), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA1321492610.3390/MA13214926 ↗
20. Kramar, S., & Ducman, V. (2018). Evaluation of ash pozzolanic activity by means of the strength activity index test, Frattini test and DTA/TG analysis. Tehnicki Vjesnik, 25(6), 1746–1752. https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-2017120319322910.17559/TV-20171203193229 ↗
21. Lanas, J., Pérez Bernal, J. L., Bello, M. A., & Alvarez, J. I. (2006). Mechanical properties of masonry repair dolomitic lime-based mortars. Cement and Concrete Research, 36(5), 951–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2005.10.00410.1016/j.cemconres.2005.10.004 ↗
22. Li, X., Snellings, R., Antoni, M., Mariel, N., Cyr, M., Hooton, D., et al. (2018). Reactivity tests for supplementary cementitious materials: RILEM TC 267-TRM phase 1. Materials and Structures. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1269-x10.1617/s11527-018-1269-x ↗
23. Lide, D. R. (2004). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja033637210.1021/ja0336372 ↗
24. Liguori, B., Aprea, P., Gennaro, B., Iucolano, F., Colella, A., & Caputo, D. (2019). Pozzolanic activity of zeolites: The role of Si/Al ratio. Materials, 12(24), Article 4231. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA1224423110.3390/MA12244231 ↗
25. Lima, S. C. L., Costa, L. C. B., Defáveri, K. C. S., de Carvalho, J. M. F., Peixoto, R. A. F., & Brigolini, G. J. (2020a). Study on assessment of pozzolanic activity: Slate cutting waste. ACI Materials Journal. https://doi.org/10.14359/5172461110.14359/51724611 ↗
26. Lima, S. C. L., Costa, L. C. B., Defáveri, K. C. S., de Carvalho, J. M. F., Peixoto, R. A. F., & Brigolini, G. J. (2020b). Study on assessment of pozzolanic activity: Slate cutting waste. ACI Materials Journal, 117(3), 3–10.
27. Luxán, M. P., Madruga, F., & Saavedra, J. (1989). Rapid evaluation of pozzolanic activity of natural products by conductivity measurement. Cement and Concrete Research, 19(1), 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(89)90066-510.1016/0008-8846(89)90066-5 ↗
28. Mohammed, S. (2017). Processing, effect and reactivity assessment of artificial pozzolans obtained from clays and clay wastes: A review. Construction and Building Materials, 140, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2017.02.07810.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2017.02.078 ↗
29. Pinheiro, V. D., Alexandre, J., Xavier, GdeC., Marvila, M. T., Monteiro, S. N., & Azevedo, ARGde. (2023). Methods for evaluating pozzolanic reactivity in calcined clays: A review. Materials, 16(13), Article 4778. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA1613477810.3390/MA16134778 ↗
30. Provis, J. L., & Bernal, S. A. (2014). Geopolymers and related alkali-activated materials. Annual Review of Materials Research, 44, 299–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-MATSCI-070813-11351510.1146/ANNUREV-MATSCI-070813-113515 ↗
31. Shim, S. H., Lee, T. H., Yang, S. J., Noor, N. B. M., & Kim, J. H. J. (2021). Calculation of cement composition using a new model compared to the Bogue model. Materials, 14(16), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1416466310.3390/ma14164663 ↗
32. Snellings, R., Li, X., Avet, F., & Scrivener, K. (2019). A rapid, robust, and relevant (R3) reactivity test for supplementary cementitious materials. ACI Materials Journal. https://doi.org/10.14359/5171671910.14359/51716719 ↗
33. Standard test methods for sampling and testing fly ash or natural pozzolans for use in Portland-cement concrete. (2022). ASTM C311–22.
34. Tabatabai, M., Bailey, S., Bursac, Z., Tabatabai, H., Wilus, D., & Singh, K. P. (2021). An introduction to new robust linear and monotonic correlation coefficients. BMC Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12859-021-04098-410.1186/S12859-021-04098-4 ↗
35. Tashima, M. M., Soriano, L., Borrachero, M. V., Akasaki, J. L., & Paya, J. (2014). New method to assess the pozzolanic reactivity of mineral admixtures by means of pH and electrical conductivity measurements in lime:Pozzolan suspensions. Materiales De Construcción, 64(316), 30–32. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2014.0091410.3989/mc.2014.00914 ↗
36. Thorstensen, R. T., & Fidjestol, P. (2015). Inconsistencies in the pozzolanic strength activity index (SAI) for silica fume according to EN and ASTM. Materials and Structures, 48(12), 3979–3990. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0457-610.1617/s11527-014-0457-6 ↗
37. Uzal, B., Turanli, L., Yücel, H., Göncüoǧlu, M. C., & Çulfaz, A. (2010). Pozzolanic activity of clinoptilolite: A comparative study with silica fume, fly ash and a non-zeolitic natural pozzolan. Cement and Concrete Research, 40(3), 398–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.10.01610.1016/j.cemconres.2009.10.016 ↗
38. Velázquez, S., Monzó, J., Borrachero, M., & Payá, J. (2014). Assessment of pozzolanic activity using methods based on the measurement of electrical conductivity of suspensions of Portland cement and pozzolan. Materials, 7(11), 7533–7547. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma711753310.3390/ma7117533 ↗
39. Zoski, C. G. (2006). Handbook of electrochemistry. Handbook of Electrochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-51958-0.X5000-910.1016/B978-0-444-51958-0.X5000-9 ↗