Predicting the Compressive Strength of Ultra-high Strength Geopolymer Concrete Using Multiple Linear Regression

Lelly Marini

doi:10.53893/ijrvocas.v5i4.483

Authors

Lelly Marini Politeknik Negeri Pontianak

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53893/ijrvocas.v5i4.483

Keywords:

Ultra-high strength Geopolymer Concrete, Multiple Linear Regression, Compressive Strength prediction, silica alumina ratio, mix design optimization

Abstract

The growing demand for sustainable yet high-performance construction materials has intensified research into alternatives to Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), whose production accounts for approximately 7–8% of global CO₂ emissions. Geopolymer Concrete (GPC), synthesized through the alkali activation of aluminosilicate-rich industrial by-products, has emerged as a promising low-carbon binder. However, the design of Ultra-High-Performance Geopolymer Concrete (UHGC), typically characterized by compressive strengths exceeding 120 MPa, remains highly complex due to the strong sensitivity of mechanical performance to mix composition, activator chemistry, and reinforcement parameters. This study proposes a transparent, data-driven framework for predicting and optimizing UHGC compressive strength using Multiple Linear Regression (MLR). A comprehensive dataset comprising 72 UHGC mixtures (122.9–168.8 MPa) was compiled, incorporating key variables including precursor ratio, Si/Al ratio, steel fiber volume fraction, superplasticizer content, and water-to-binder ratio. The MLR model demonstrated excellent predictive accuracy and generalization, achieving R² values of 0.944 and 0.921 for training and testing datasets, respectively, with low RMSE (~4.5 MPa). Statistical analysis confirmed the dominance of the Si/Al ratio and water-to-binder ratio as the most influential parameters governing UHGC strength. Experimental validation using nine independently designed UHGC mixtures further confirmed the robustness of the model, yielding a high correlation between predicted and measured strengths (R² = 0.954) with a mean absolute percentage error below 1%. The optimal formulation achieved a compressive strength of 168.8 MPa at a Si/Al ratio of approximately 6.0 with 1.0% steel fiber content. Compared to more complex machine learning models, the proposed MLR approach offers competitive accuracy while retaining full interpretability, enabling rational mix design and informed decision-making. This study demonstrates that interpretable predictive modeling can effectively bridge geopolymer chemistry and UHGC mix optimization, providing a practical and sustainable pathway for the development of next-generation ultra-high-performance construction materials.

References

J. L. Provis and J. S. J. van Deventer, Alkali avtivated materials: State of Art Report. 2014.

Y. Lee, “Achieving Sustainability in Concrete and Construction : Challenges and Opportunities,” J. Civ. Eng. Constr., vol. 8, no. 2 (May-August, 2022), pp. 17–26, 2022.

Z. Zhang et al., “The Influence of Fly Ash and Slag on the Mechanical Properties of Geopolymer Concrete,” Buildings, vol. 14, no. 9, p. 2720, 2024, doi: 10.3390/buildings14092720.

W. He, B. Li, X. Meng, and Q. Shen, “Compound Effects of Sodium Chloride and Gypsum on the Compressive Strength and Sulfate Resistance of Slag-Based Geopolymer Concrete,” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 675, 2023, doi: 10.3390/buildings13030675.

P. Chindaprasirt, U. Rattanasak, and S. Taebuanhuad, “Resistance to acid and sulfate solutions of microwave-assisted high calcium fly ash geopolymer,” Mater. Struct. Constr., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 375–381, 2013, doi: 10.1617/s11527-012-9907-1.

P. Chindaprasirt, U. Rattanasak, and S. Taebuanhuad, “Role of microwave radiation in curing the fly ash geopolymer,” Adv. Powder Technol., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 703–707, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.apt.2012.12.005.

K. Celik, C. Meral, A. Petek Gursel, P. K. Mehta, A. Horvath, and P. J. M. Monteiro, “Mechanical properties, durability, and life-cycle assessment of self-consolidating concrete mixtures made with blended portland cements containing fly ash and limestone powder,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 56, pp. 59–72, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2014.11.003.

Y. Zhang, R. Wang, and J. Ni, “Study on the preparation , performance , and mechanism for solid waste cementitious materials,” Case Stud. Constr. Mater., vol. 20, no. January, p. e03408, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03408.

X. Ouyang, Y. Ma, Z. Liu, J. Liang, and G. Ye, “Effect of the sodium silicate modulus and slag content on fresh and hardened properties of alkali-activated fly ash/slag,” Minerals, vol. 10, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.3390/min10010015.

M. Verma, N. Dev, I. Rahman, M. Nigam, M. Ahmed, and J. Mallick, “Geopolymer Concrete: A Material for Sustainable Development in Indian Construction Industries,” Crystals, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1–24, 2022, doi: 10.3390/cryst12040514.

H. Castillo et al., “Factors affecting the compressive strength of geopolymers: A review,” Minerals, vol. 11, no. 12, 2021, doi: 10.3390/min11121317.

M. A. Hosen, M. I. Shammas, S. K. Shill, S. Al-Deen, M. Z. Jumaat, and H. Hashim, “Ductility Enhancement of Sustainable Fibrous-Reinforced High-Strength Lightweight Concrete,” Polymers (Basel)., vol. 14, no. 4, 2022, doi: 10.3390/polym14040727.

A. L. Almutairi, B. A. Tayeh, A. Adesina, H. F. Isleem, and A. M. Zeyad, “Potential applications of geopolymer concrete in construction: A review,” Case Stud. Constr. Mater., vol. 15, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00733.

A. Kurniawan and L. Himawan, “Synergistic Effects of Steel Fibers and Silica Fume on Concrete Exposed to High Temperatures and Gamma Radiation,” J. Tek. Sipil Constr. UNTAN, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 2250–2257, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.26418/jts.v25i3.89931.

E. P. Putra, B. Herbudiman, and R. Ranastra Irawan, “Efek Kadar Polycarboxylate Ether (PCE) terhadap Sifat Mekanik Beton Geopolimer Berbasis Fly Ash,” Reka Racana, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 136–147, 2016.

F. A. Memon, M. F. Nuruddin, S. Demie, and N. Shafiq, “Effect of superplasticizer and extra water on workability and compressive strength of self-compacting geopolymer concrete,” Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 407–414, 2012.

A. Qayyum Khan, H. Ahmad Awan, M. Rasul, Z. Ahmad Siddiqi, and A. Pimanmas, “Optimized artificial neural network model for accurate prediction of compressive strength of normal and high strength concrete,” Clean. Mater., vol. 10, no. November, p. 100211, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.clema.2023.100211.

H. U. Ahmed, A. A. Mohammed, and A. Mohammed, “Soft computing models to predict the compressive strength of GGBS/FAgeopolymer concrete,” PLoS One, vol. 17, no. 5 5, pp. 1–20, 2022, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265846.

K. Xiao et al., “Prediction of compressive strength of high-performance concrete based on multiple machine learning models,” Front. Mater., vol. 12, no. October, pp. 1–12, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fmats.2025.1698248.