SYNERGY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,

BBSR

MAJOR PROJECT REPORT

ON
A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY ON COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH PREDICTION OF GROUND
GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG BASED
GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE
SUBMITTED TO
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
BY
SUBHASIS DASH

Regd. No – 1801335025

UNDER GUIDENCE OF

Prof. PANKAJ KU. DASH

 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,
SYNERGY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, BHUBANESWAR

CERTIFICATE
This is to Certify that this project report entitled “A COMPREHENSIVE
STUDY ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH PREDICTION OF GROUND
GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG BASED GEOPOLYMER
CONCRETE submitted to Synergy Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar, is
a bonafide record of work done by SUBHASIS DASH bearing university regd.
No. 1801335025 in partial fulfilment of requirement for the degree of Bachelor of
Technology in Civil Engineering of Biju Patnaik University of Technology,
Rourkela under our supervision and guidance.

Guided by Head of the Department

Prof. Pankaj Ku. Dash Prof. Pankaj Ku. Dash

External
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Project work is a team work and through it is possible to give our
individual thanks to all our faculties personally; we take this opportunity to express
our gratitude to them. We would like to acknowledge and external my heartfelt
gratitude to the following persons who have made the completion of this project
report possible.

We would like to thankProf. Pankaj Kumar Dash (H.O.D), Department of

Civil Engineering for his motivation and inspiration and affectionate care enable us
to complete our work smoothly and successfully.

We would like to express our sincere thanks to all the faculty members Er.
Manisha Mohanty, Er. Shrinu Mohanty, Department of Civil Engineering for
their kind help and assistance.

We would also thankful to Er. Sanjukta Panda and Er. Lopamudra

Sahoofor providing the laboratory facilities and giving us support to carry out the
project work smoothly and easily.

We would also thankful to Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Choudhury to various help

during project work.
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the project work entitled “A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY

ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH PREDICTION OF GROUND
GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG BASED GEOPOLYMER
CONCRETE”submitted to the Synergy Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar,
is a report of an original work done by us under the guidance of Prof. Pankaj
Kumar Dash (H.O.D) and the project work is partial fulfilment of the requirement
for the award of the degree of bachelor of technology in civil engineering. The
result embodied in thesis have not be submitted to any other University or Institute
for the award of Degree.

Name: - SUBHASIS DASH

Date: - Regd. No: - 1801335025

 CONTENTS
Page no.

ABSTRACT 1

Chapter – 1 – INTRODUCTION 2-16

1.1 Introduction 3-4

1.2 Objective of the Project 4

1.3 Scope of the Project 5

1.4 Material Selection 5-12

1.4.1 GGBS 5-6

1.4.2 Binding Solution: Alkaline Solution 6-8

1.4.2.1 Sodium Hydroxide 7-8

1.4.2.2 Sodium Silicate 8

1.4.3 Aggregate 8-10

1.4.3.1 Fine Aggregate 8-9

1.4.3.2 Coarse Aggregate 9-10

1.4.4 Admixture 10-11

1.4.5 Distilled Water 11

1.4.6 Water 12

1.5 Geo-polymerization Mechanism 12-13

1.6 Mechanical Properties of Geopolymer Concrete 13-14

1.7 Durability Aspects of Geopolymer Concrete 14-15

1.8 Curing of Geopolymer Concrete 15

1.9 Micro Structure of Geopolymer Concrete 15-16

1.10 Field Application 16

1.11 Thesis Arrangement 16

Chapter – 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW 17-28

2.1 Introduction 18

2.2 Previous Research Review based on Geopolymer Concrete using 18-24

GGBS

2.3 Properties of GGBS 25

2.4 Comparison of Physical Properties between Cement and GGBS 26

2.5 Advantages and disadvantages of GGBS 26-27

2.6 Application of GGBS 27-28

Chapter – 3 – EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME 29-34

3.1 Mixing of Geopolymer Concrete 30

3.2 Mix Design of Geopolymer Concrete 31-32

3.3 Preparation of Alkali Solution 32-33

3.4 Preparation of Specimens 33-34

3.4.1 Mixing 33

3.4.2 Casting 33

3.4.3 Curing 33

Chapter – 4 – RESULT AND DISCUSSION 35-41

4.1 Introduction 36

4.2 Compressive Strength 36

4.3 Geopolymer concrete cube Strength 36-41

EXPERIMENTAL PHOTOGRAPH 42-47

CHAPTER – 5 – GENERAL OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION 48-50

5.1 Introduction 49

5.2 Conclusion 49

5.3 Recommendation 49-50

5.3.1 Application 49

5.3.2 Limitation 49-50

5.4 Future Scope 50

BIBLIOGRAPHY 51-52

LIST OF TABLES

1. Chemical Composition of GGBS 6

2. Physical properties of Fine Aggregate 9

3. Physical properties of Coarse Aggregate 9

4. Properties of GGBS 25

5. Comparison of Physical properties between Cement and GGBS 26

6. Application of GGBS 28

7. Typical Mix proportion of GGBS based geopolymer concrete 32

8. Result of Compressive Strength of Geopolymer Concrete made of 37

GGBS at age of 7 days

9. Result of Compressive Strength of Geopolymer Concrete made of 38

GGBS at age of 14 days

10. Result of Compressive Strength of Geopolymer Concrete made of 39

GGBS at age of 28 days

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag 6

2. Sodium Hydroxide Solution 7

3. Sodium Silicate Solution 8

4. Fine Aggregate 9

5. Coarse Aggregate 10

6. Admixture 11

7. Distilled Water 11

8. Water 12

9. Typical geopolymer process on GGBS as binder 13

10. Mixing process of Geopolymer Concrete 30

11. Flow Chart of Laboratory work 34

12. Average compressive Strength in respective days 40

13. Comparison of Compressive strength of Different Mix in respective 41

days
 ABSTRACT
Construction has been most important human activity since ancient time. Concrete is the most
popular material widely used and reliable material for construction works in which cement is the
main composite. Environmental issues resulted from cement production have become a major
concern today. To develop a sustainable future, it is encourage limiting the use of this
construction material that can affect the environment.

The manufacturing of cement involves the emission of greenhouse gases in to the

atmosphere which are responsible for global warming. Hence the researchers are currently
focused on various materials to replace and reducing the usage of cement. The geopolymer
concrete has stepped in the construction industry as an alternate to the cement-based concrete.
Many of the research about geopolymer concrete states that it has potential to replace the
cement-based concrete in many countries depending on the locally available resources. The
present review deals with the study of constituents of geopolymer concrete.

In this study Geopolymer concrete is prepared with Ground Granulated Blast Furnace
Slag (GGBS). GGBS is the by-product produced from steel industry. The geopolymer concrete
chosen is based on 100% GGBS cured in laboratory in typical tropical ambient environmental
condition. For this project, the mix design is carried out for 14M concentration of sodium
hydroxide. The specimen of size 150×150×150mm cubes are casted and the specimens of
geopolymer concrete are cured at ambient temperature of 7 days, 14 days and 28 days. The cured
specimens were then tested for compressive strength.

1
 Chapter – 1

INTRODUCTION

2
 INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION

Cement concrete is manmade material which prepared by mixing of cement, water, natural fine
and coarse aggregate. The past century developed cement concrete as material for construction
work. In 1902 August Perret, first designed building in Paris with structural components beams,
slabs and columns. Construction variety of infrastructure and industrial sector by concrete makes
it is an essential product. It is widely used manmade material in the globe. It is produced by
natural materials; it is reliable material, gives architectural freedom.

It is widely known that the production of Portland cement consumes considerable energy
and at the same time contributes a large volume of CO 2 to the atmosphere. In cement Industry,
research has been carried out in collection of latest material and up gradation of technology. In
India 93% of cement industry uses dry process technology which is environment friendly. The
old process technology and semi dry process technology is being used by 7% of cement industry.
There is reduction in emission level of CO 2due to the waste heat recovery in cement plant. After
steel and aluminum, cement is the next material which produces high energy. It also uses an
ample amount of non-renewable materials, e.g. coal, limestone etc.About 65% of global
warming is caused by CO₂. The cement industry is not suitable for sustainable industry since it
causes high pollution to the environment, So, there is necessity for alternate material for cement
in the concrete which should be eco-friendly, should satisfy mechanical properties and durability
characteristics. This new material should be more superior, preferable compared to conventional
concrete based on cement.

From the Last few years the of cement is increasing in a population increases the demand
for electricity also rapid manner due to the population increase. As the increased due to this
reason electricity production by thermal power stations are also in large scale.From these power
stations simultaneously the fly ash disposal increases and this disposal in to the environment is a
problem. As the structures are reinforced with steel lot of steel demand is there, due to this iron
production industries are more, from this industries slag is disposed and the slag is converted to
ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS).

Where research works were carried out from several years to conform geopolymer
concrete is a good material for construction purpose. Geopolymer is an addition of binder on

3
OPC. Currently the binder material is used in OPC as an option and the innovation of this
technique applied by the cement industries. The geopolymer concrete was suggested by
Davidovitsin 1978. From the manufacturing of cement from industries increases the global
warming due to gradually stretching the releasing amount of CO 2 is 80% and other harmful gases
in climate to the atmosphere. The binding material can be produced when the source material i.e.
having rich in silica and alumina added by high alkaline solution and this methodology is known
as Geo-polymerization Revenue generated by construction industry in India is huge and waste
generated by power industries and steel industries are more. So, these are considered as industrial
bi products and by using it in construction industry may reduce the cost and the produced waste
can be used in reducing usage of construction material. By using GGBS in cement, leads path to
some of these new concretes other than Ordinary Portland cement-based concrete and we require
adopting some new concretes where OPCC are weak. Extreme research been carried out to find
the potential of GPC by developing alternate concretes in India which is a great move in
reducing the industrial waste being generated by relied industries. The use of GPC is slowly
being accepted, mostly in chemical resistance structures and research been taken some
momentum to extend the usage When industrial waste like GPC got some inorganic binders like
silicon and aluminum, found to have high durability.

Geopolymer concrete is new material to be developed for use in construction work which
should be eco-friendly. The following are the properties of geopolymer concrete

 Geopolymer concrete sets at room temperature

 It is non toxic
 It has long life
 It is impermeable
 It is a bad thermal conductor and possess high resistance to inorganic solvents
 It gives more strength

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT

The aim of the project is to study the influence of parameters such as alkaline solution to
binder ratio, curing condition on compressive strength of GGBS based geopolymer concrete at
various ages.

4
1.3 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

 To study the effect of alkaline solution to binder ratio, concentration of sodium hydroxide
solution and curing condition of GGBS based geopolymer concrete.
 Ratio of alkaline solution to binder by mass varies as 0.35, 0.40 & 0.45.
 Ambient curing was adopted.
 To determine the compressive strength of GGBS based geopolymer concrete at various
ages such as 7 days, 14 days and 28 days.

1.4MATERIAL SELECTION

1.4.1 GGBS

GGBS is a by-product generated during manufacturing of pig iron and steel and may be defined
according to ACI-116R as "nonmetallic product consisting essentially of calcium d silicates and
other bases that is developed in a molten condition simultaneously with iron in a blast furnace."
It is used for iron manufacturing, about 1500 degrees centigrade iron core, coke and limestone
are fed in to the furnace. Where the iron ore becomes iron and the remaining materials forms like
molten slag and floats on the top surface of the iron in the furnace and this slag is taken out from
the furnace and rapid quenching with water after that it forms like granulated slag is grinded after
this process ground granulated blast furnace slag is formed. It consists primarily of silicates,
alumina-silicate and calcium alumina- silicates. The cooling process of slag is responsible
mainly for generating different types of slags required for various end users. The physical and
pozzolanic properties of slag vary widely with the process of cooling. GGBS is a non-toxic
material and can be a good raw material for making high-value and user-friendly cementitious
material for different civil engineering applications. The various aluminosilicate materials such
as FA., Metakaolin, GGBS. Silica fume etc. can be used as source materials for alkali activation.
Of late, most of the research on alkali-activation has been used FA as the starting materials.
However, studies on Alkali-activated blast furnace slag are still very limited. Thus, more study
has to be carried out before arriving at any definite conclusion. In order to have complete
understanding of the possibilities of applications of alkali activated blast furnace in different
fields, a thorough study of its manufacturing processes, synthesizing parameters, mix design are
very much essential.

5
 Fig 1.1 Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag

The chemical composition is given below.

Table 1.1 Chemical composition of GGBS

Sl. No Characteristics GGBS (% wt)

1 Aluminium Oxide 7-12

2 Calcium Oxide 34-43

3 Sulphur 1.0-1.9

4 Magnesium Oxide 0.15-0.76

5 Silica 27-38

6 Manganese Oxide 7-15

7 Iron Oxide 0.2-1.6

1.4.2 Binding Solution: Alkaline Solution

Binding solution used in geo-polymerization process is an alkaline solution comprising of

mixture of NaOH and Na2Sio3, in varying proportions. As explained in the mechanism this
alkaline solution dissolves the binder to get alumino-silicate products which have the cementing

6
property. According to Petermen the activation of the selected pozzolanic material is the most
significant factor in producing a mechanically-sound cementitious material via the geo-
polymerization process. The initial mechanism of reaction is driven by the ability of the alkaline
solution to dissolve the pozzolanic material and release reactive silicon and aluminum into
solution. The activators prompt the precipitation and crystallization of the siliceous and
aluminous species present in the solution. OH, acts as a catalyst for reactivity, and the metal
cation serves to form a structural element and balance the negative framework carried by the
tetrahedral aluminum. Palomo et al.concluded that the type of alkaline liquid as a precursor plays
an important role in the polymerization process. Reactions occur at a high rate when the alkaline
liquid contains soluble silicate of sodium or potassium. In comparison with the use of only
alkaline hydroxides. Xu and Van Deventer confirmed that the addition of sodium silicate
solution[Na:SIO) to the sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution as the alkaline liquid improved the
reaction between the source material and the solution. The most common alkaline liquid used in
geo-polymerization is a combination of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or potassium hydroxide
(KOH) and sodium silicate or potassium silicate. Furthermore, after study of the geo-
polymerization of natural Al-Si minerals by Hardjito et al. and Panagiotopoulou et al. found that
generally the NaOH solution caused a higher extent of dissolution of minerals than the KOH
solution. Hence in the present work NaOH and Na 2SiO3, are used as binding solution. The
activator solution was prepared one day prior to its use in specimen casting.

1.4.2.1 Sodium Hydroxide

Fig 1.2 Sodium Hydroxide

7
The sodium hydroxide is available in flakes with purity of 97%-98% purity. According to require
concentration sodium hydroxide is added in to distilled water to make solution. The specific
gravity of sodium hydroxide is 1.99 used in this project work.

1.4.2.2 Sodium Silicate

The sodium silicate (Na2O = 10%, SiO2 = 27%, water = 63%) was purchased from supplier in
form of gel. The specific gravity of sodium silicate is 1.61 is used in this project work.

Fig 1.3 Sodium Silicate

1.4.3 Aggregates

It may be noted that any concrete requires fine aggregates and coarse aggregates so that a
packing of these two inert filler materials creates minimum space for binder paste in the concrete
mix and this is required from economic point of view also since binder portion is generally the
most expensive in any concrete mix. Locally available crushed sand and crushed granite coarse
aggregates are used at the saturated surface dry condition for geopolymer concrete mixes.

1.4.3.1 Fine Aggregate

In this investigation natural river sand is used as fine aggregates. Sand was obtained from local
sources. Fine aggregate which is passing through IS 4.75mm sieve and retained on IS 2.3mm
sieve is considered for the experimental work.

8
 Table 1.2 Physical Properties of Fine Aggregate

Specific gravity 2.6

Fineness modulus 3.02

Water absorption 0.5%

Silt content 3%

Fig 1.4 Fine Aggregate

1.4.3.2 Coarse Aggregate

Aggregates consist of natural occurring crushed, uncrushed stones, gravel and sand It should be
strong, clear, hard, durable and free from adherent coating and free from disintegrate pieces,
alkali and other deleterious substances as far as possibleand elongation pieces should be avoided.
In this investigation the locally available aggregates from crusher 20mm sieve passing 6.3 mm
sieve retained is used.

Table 1.3 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates

Specific Gravity 2.7

Fineness modulus 7.54

Water absorption 0.5%

Bulk density 1366.27 kg/m3

9
 Fig 1.5 Coarse Aggregate

1.4.4 Admixtures

Various superplasticizers can be used to substantially improve the workability of fresh concrete
without increasing the amount of water and hence reducing the risk of segregation. In order to
improve the workability of fresh concrete, Raijiwala and Patil used high-range water-reducing
naphthalene-based superplasticizer with the dosage from 0.6-2.0% of the weight of geopolymer
solids. Kumar et al. used polycarboxylate ether based high performance superplasticizers in the
concrete. The utilization of viscosity modifying admixture gives more possibilities of controlling
segregation and homogeneity of the mix. However, in some cases, the use of superplasticizer
may have an adverse effect on the strength of geopolymer. Therefore, the type and dosage of
superplasticizer shall be used after trial mixes as the preliminary experiment. Though the
previous works quote about the use of naphthalene based super plasticizer, in the present study
such admixtures did not show any effect on the fresh concrete. But admixtures based on the
polycarboxylate ethers showed theimprovement in the workability of concrete ahence they are
adopted in the present research.

10
 Fig 1.6 Admixture

1.4.5 Distilled Water

Distilled water is water that has been boiled into vapor and condensed back in to liquid in a
separate container. Impurities in the original water that do not boil below or near the boiling
point of water remain in the original container. Thus, distilled water is a type of purified water.

Fig 1.7 Distilled Water

11
1.4.6 Water

This is the least expensive, but most important ingredient of concrete. The water, which is used
for making concrete, should be clean and free from harmful impurities such as oil, alkali, acid,
etc. In general, the water which is fit for drinking should be used for making concrete. The
functions of water are as follows:

 Water reacts chemically with cement to form the binding matrix in which the inert
aggregates are held in suspension until the matrix has hardened.
 Water serves also as a vehicle or lubricant between the fine and coarse aggregates in
order that the concrete may be made more readily placeable in forms.

Generally, for better strength a proper water cement ratio is considered accordingto mix
proportion of concrete grade.

Fig 1.8 Water

1.5GEO-POLYMERIZATION MECHANISM

Similar to conventional organic polymerization, this process involves forming monomers in

solution, the activating them to polymerize to form a solid polymer. This geo-polymerization
process involves three separate but interrelated stages
12
  Dissolution-During initial mixing the alkaline solution dissolves silicon and aluminium
ions from the amorphous phases of the binder like fly ash or GGBS.
 Condensation- In this solution, neighboring silicon or aluminium hydroxide molecules
undergo a condensation reaction where adjacent hydroxyl ions from these nearest
molecules condense to form an oxygen bond connecting these molecules, and a free
molecule of water.
 Polymerization- Monomers and other silicon and aluminium hydroxide molecules
condense to form rigid chains or nets of oxygen bonded tetrahedral with application of
mild temperatures or even at ambient temperatures. All the three process of geo-
polymerization are shown in figure.

Fig 1.9 Typical geo-polymerization process on GGBS as binder

1.6MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

The mechanical properties of geopolymer concrete are dependent upon many variables like
binder content, type of alkaline solution, molarity of alkaline solution, aggregate size
distribution, and type of mixing and curing conditions. Generally, more than 75- 80% volume in
geopolymer concrete is occupied by the aggregates. The aggregates are normally taken as inert
materials dispersed throughout the matrix. Similar to the conventional concrete, geopolymer
concrete can also be reinforced for improving its mechanical properties with different kinds of

13
fibres and additives. With the present literature, it is being observed that geopolymer concrete
upto M100 grade, is possible with different mixing procedures. Li and Liu found that the
incorporation of slag could significantly increase the compressive strength of the geopolymer at
30°C ambient curing. According to Susan et al.the strengths and the toughness of Ordinary
Portland Cement Concretes with the same proportion of binderwere lesser than the Geo-
concretes.

1.7DURABILITY ASPECTS OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

When compared to conventional concrete systems, geopolymers are new materials which
completely lack the long service and durability issues history that would enable an accurate
prediction and control of structural deterioration, Performance requirements, drivers for
deterioration and means of predicting and characterizing changes that will ultimately result in
failure need to be assessed Geopolymer cements are inherently resistant to chemical attack and
thermal loading due to their reduced porosity and thermal conductivity characteristics. Many of
the durability problems associated with plane cement concrete arise from its calcium content in
the main phases The CIA reacts with sulfate ions in the presence of Ca (OH): to form ettringite
and gypsum, which in turn cause expansion and degradation of the cement into a non-cohesive
granular mass. It is the low calcium content found within pozzolanic materials that prevents
geopolymers from experiencing such negative effects. Since no limestone is used as a material,
geopolymer cement has excellent properties within both acid and salt environments. Chanh et
al.concludes that geopolymer concrete is suitable for tough environmental conditions and
seawater can be used for the blending of the geopolymer cement which can be useful in marine
environments and on islands short of fresh water. From Hard to et al.works it is clear that
geopolymer concrete do not show any sign of sulfate attack or degradation in compressive
strength, the unit mass, the length change, and in visual appearance. The Geopolymers are
resistant to the corrosion and do not exhibit any sign of deterioration for long periods of time
when exposed to environment of NaCL solution. However, geopolymer concrete exhibits a
decrease in residual compressive strength when immersed in 10% Magnesium Sulphate solution
which may be attributed to occurrence of micro cracks due to formation of gypsum and ettringite
in the surface pores. According to Sanni and Khadirnaikar the strength of GPC gradually
decreases as the day of exposure to sulphuric acid increases. The degradation on strength is
related to depolymerisation of aluminosilicate polymers in acidic media and the formation of
zeolites. But in comparison with the different previous literatures many experiments and
14
statements are contradictory about durability issues related to different exposure conditions of
geopolymer concrete. Hence it is very much needed to study the durability issues related to it.

1.8CURING OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

Curing is a main important process for both strength and durability of geopolymer concrete.
Geopolymer concrete needs to be cured in a high temperature to accelerate a reaction of geo-
polymerization. Duration, temperature and type of curing have been investigated by various
researchers like Olivia and Nikraz and Mustafa et al Curing process of geopolymer concrete can
be achieved by oven curing (30-90 °C), hot gunny curing (33-38 C). ambient curing (27-32°C).
and external exposure curing (39-44°C). Special curing techniques like steam curing at
temperature of 60°C for 24 hours followed by air curing in a control environment with a
temperature of 23-2 °C until testing can also be followed. There is an increase in compressive
strength with the increase in age for ambient cured specimens According to Vijai et al., the
increase in compressive strength with age is very less as compared to that of specimens subjected
to ambient curing for hot cured samples. The rate of increase in strength will be rapid up to 24
hours of curing time; beyond 24 hours, the gain in strength is only moderate Therefore, heat-
curing time need not be more than 24 hours in practical applications. Heat-curing can be
achieved by either steam-curing or dry-curing According to Rangan, 25-35°C range of
temperature can be V provided by the ambient curing conditions in tropicalclimates. So, in the
present study the adopted curing regime is only restricted to ambient curing As there are no
standard codes established for the mix design of geopolymer concrete in any part of the world, so
for the mix design process is carried on basis of some ofthe following thumb rules like density of
concrete as 2400kg/m³, quantity of total aggregates as 80% of the total constituents, coarse
aggregate content as 70-75% of total aggregates.

1.9MICROSTRUCTURE OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

While conventional cements are composed of portlandite Ca(OH):) and calcium silicate hydrate
(C-S-H) phases, geopolymer cement is based on an aluminosilicate.The microstructure of
geopolymer specimens may be viewed as composites comprising of aluminosilicate gel phase
and partially reacted binder particles. According to Alehyen et al.the microstructure of
geopolymer concrete shows a highly complex product morphology that consists of unreacted,
partially reacted, and completely reacted fly ash spheres that are surrounded by a matrix which
also includes quartz crystals and mullite needles originating from the fly ash. The bigger fly ash
15
particles are almost dissolved or reduced to smaller size at higher silica content showing denser
and finer microstructure as a result of geo-polymerization, which indicates a higher degree of
reaction resulting in increasing compressive strength. Therefore, the compactnessof the
microstructure indicates the proper dissolution of Si and Al due to which good binding has been
developed between binder and aggregates; resulting in higher strength of concrete. However,
many of the works related to microstructure are with geopolymer concrete with fly ash as
binding material. Hence it is needed to understand the microstructural property of geopolymer
concrete made with GGBS. Microstructure also helps to predict the reason for the failure of
concrete with durability issues in different environments.

1.10FIELD APPLICATIONS

Geopolymer concrete and its technology have just begun to capture the imagination of the
building industry. Though the geopolymer concrete technology is in the developing stage, but
presently it is being used already in some countries in the field application. It has also become
commercial in the construction industry. For example, the British Company Banah UK sells its
cement "Banah-cem" as geopolymer cement. Zeobond, an Australian company markets its
cement free binder concrete as 'E Crete' which is a geopolymer concrete. The world's first
building using Geopolymer concrete for structural purpose is being built by Bligh Tanner and
Wagners, designed by Hassell which is University of Queensland's Global Change Institute
(GCI) in Australia.

1.11 THESIS ARRANGEMENT

Chapter 1 gives introduction about the evolution of geopolymer concrete.

Chapter 2 presents the information about the constituents of geopolymer concrete and its
applications. This chapter also provides a detailed literature review of geopolymer technology.

Chapter 3 describes the experimental program carried out develop the mixture proportions, the
mixing process and the curing conditions of geopolymer concrete.

Chapter 4 presents and discuss the test result of various parameters such as alkaline solution to
GGBS ratio, curing condition of geopolymer concrete.

Chapter 5 present the General observation and conclusion.

16
 Chapter – 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

17
 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION

An attempt has been made in this chapter to make a review of the available relevant to the
topicof study. Considerable amount of literature is available on the response characteristics of
GGBS based geopolymer concrete and fly ash with other waste products such as red mud, palm
oil fuel ash, rice husk ash based geopolymer concrete but the literatures on the only GGBS based
geopolymer concrete are very limited. Among the study done in the field of GGBS based
geopolymer concrete, some of them are as follows.

2.2 PREVIOUS RESEARCH REVIEW BASED ON GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

BY USING GGBS

Joseph Davidovits et al.(1994) stated in geopolymer concrete Geo-polymerization is the

main process involves a chemical reaction between alumina-silicate oxidepresent in source
material and alkali silicates of alkaline activator solution yielding a three dimensional polymeric

ring structure consisting of Si-O-Al bonds. For chemical designation, this alumina-silicate based
geopolymer was named as isolated. Isolated is an abbreviation for silicon-oxo-aluminates. The
isolate network consists of SiO4 and AlO4tetrahedral linked alternatively by sharing all the
oxygen. In 1978, Joseph Davidovits coined the term geopolymer to denote a wide range of
materials characterized by networks or chains of inorganic molecules. He has suggested that an
alkaline activator solution could be used to react with Silicon (Si) and Aluminium (Al) present in
a source material of geological origin or in by-products of several industries such as ground
granulated blast furnace slag, fly ash and rice husk ash to produce binders These are
fundamentally inorganic alumino-silicate polymers synthesized from a fast-chemical reaction
called “Polymerization”. Due to geological origin of silicon and aluminium and polymerization
reaction it is termed as geopolyme.

Xu et al. (2000) discuss about the binding properties sodium silicate material how to bind
the material. The addition of sodium silicate solution (Na 2SiO3) to the sodium hydroxide (NaOH)
solution as the alkaline liquid improved the reaction between the source material and the
solution. The most common alkaline liquid used in geo-polymerization is a combination of

18
sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or potassium hydroxide (KOH) and sodium silicate or potassium
silicate.

Hardjito et al. (2005) claims that claimed source materials like fly ash, slag (GGBS),
claimed kaolin, and demonstrates a higher final compressive strength when compared to those
made using non-calcined materials like kaolin clay, mine tailings, and naturally occurring
minerals.

G. Duxson et al. (2006) stated importance of geopolymer concrete as the availability of

other material and their effect for production of cement. the structures are reinforced with steel
lot of steel demand is there, due to this iron production industries are more, from this industries
slag is disposed and the slag is converted to ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS). As a
civil engineer we know the problem of cement manufacture emits carbon dioxide in to the
environment which is almost equal to its production. For the production of the cement lot of
energy consumption is required i.e. lot of fossil fuels are consumed.

Mehta et al. (2006) stated the properties of geopolymer concrete but the compression
strength itself is not the property of concrete to explain the performance of concrete. Concrete
failure will always develop in weakest part of one of these three phases namely: aggregate zone,
transition zone and hydrated cement paste. Thus, in order to increase the compressive strength of
concrete, great care must be taken to strengthen all these three phases. It also depends on the
microstructural features of concrete which govern the other properties like strength, elastic
modulus and durability.

Rangan et al. (2006) stated that range of temperature 25-35°C can be provided by the
ambient curing conditions in tropical climates. So, in the present study the adopted curing regime
is only restricted to ambient curing. As there are no standard codes established for the mix design
of geopolymer concrete in any part of the world, so for the mix design process is carried on basis
of some of the following thumb rules like density of concrete as 2400kg/m3, quantity of total
aggregates as 80% of the total constituents, coarse aggregate content as 70-75% of total
aggregates.

Susan et al. (2006) concluded the strengths and the toughness of Ordinary Portland
Cement Concretes with the same proportion of binder were lesser than the GGBS based Geo-
concretes.

19
 Zongjin, Li. Et al. (2007) found that the incorporation of slag could significantly
increase the compressive strength of the geopolymer at 30°C ambient curing. The incorporation
of steel fibers in Geo-Concretes reduces the compressive strength at early ages. On the contrary,
the splitting tensile strength, the flexural strength and the toughness increase significantly.

Panagiotopoulou et al. (2007) discussthe amount of dissolution of GGBS is more than

the amount of dissolution of fly ash Therefore, in the present study GGBS is used as a source
material which is rich in silica and alumina.

Chanh et al. (2008) concludes that geopolymer concrete is suitable for tough
environmental conditions and seawater can be used for the blending of the geopolymer cement
which can be useful in marine environments and on islands short of fresh water.

B. Vijaya Rangan et al.(2010) discuss Geopolymer concrete is made by fly ash, GGBS
with alkali activation and special concrete is prepared. The energy required for the manufacture
of cement-based concrete is very large than the energy required for the manufacture of
geopolymer cement, this is affecting the environment.Where the concrete i.e. ordinary Portland
cement concrete (OPC) is not suitable at that conditions special concrete with good durability
aspect is preferred, such alternative concrete like geopolymer concrete is in needed.

Deepak et al. (2010) discuss any material that contains mostly Silicon (Si) and
Aluminium (Al) in amorphous form is a possible source material or binding material for the
manufacture of geopolymer. Several minerals and industrial by-product materials have been
investigated in the past and concluded that metakaolin or calcined kaolin, low-calcium fly ash,
combination of calcined mineral and non-calcined materials, combination of fly ash and
metakaolin, and combination of granulated blast furnace slag and metakaolin can be used as
source material.

Petermann et al.(2010) suggest the activation of the selected pozzolanic material is the
most significant factor in producing a mechanically-sound cementitious material via the geo-
polymerization process. The initial mechanism of reaction is driven by the ability of the alkaline
solution to dissolve the pozzolanic material and release reactive silicon and aluminium into
solution. The activators prompt the precipitation and crystallization of the siliceous and
aluminous species present in the solution. OH- acts as a catalyst for reactivity, and the metal
cation serves to form a structural element and balance the negative framework carried by the
tetrahedral aluminium.
20
 Nuruddin et al. (2011) stated the mixing process can be divided into two stages, dry mix
and wet mix. Initially coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and GGBS will be mixed together in
rotating pan mixer for 3 to 5 minutes. The alkaline solution is prepared by mixing sodium
hydroxide solution with sodium silicate solution one day before making the geopolymer concrete
to get the desired alkaline solution. The liquid part of the mixture i.e., the alkaline solution, extra
water and the superplasticizer, should be premixed thoroughly and then added to the dry mixture.
The wet mixing can be done for 1.5 to 3 minutes. The process of mixing is depicted. Fresh
geopolymer concrete is then hand mixed to ensure the mixture homogeneity. The aluminosilicate
gel is highly viscous and mixing agitation can easily encapsulate air into the matrix. Mechanical
vibration of the formed molds serves to reduce this potential and greatly improves the overall
strength of the hardened geopolymer concrete.

Mustafa et al. (2011). discuss curing process of geopolymer concrete can be achieved
by: oven curing (30-90°C), hot gunny curing (33-38ºC), ambient curing (27-32ºC), and external
exposure curing (39-44ºC). Special curing techniques like steam curing at temperature of 600C
for 24 hours followed by air curing in a control environment with a temperature of 23-20 0C until
testing can also be followed. There is an increase in compressive strength with the increase in
age for ambient cured specimens.

Ganesan et al. (2013) showed from the experiments that addition of steel fibres
improved the mechanical properties of GPC in the case of compressive strength, splitting tensile
strength, modulus of rupture, modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio at 1% volume fraction of
fibres.

Amuthakkannan et al. (2013) showed the improvement in tensile, impact and flexural
strength with different fibre length and fibre content of basalt fibre. But still there is need to
study the effect of fibres on geopolymer concrete as many of the works concentrated only on
mechanical properties for fibre reinforced geopolymer concrete.

Vijai et al. (2014) discuss increase in compressive strength with age is very less as
compared to that of specimens subjected to ambient curing for hot cured samples. The rate of
increase in strength will be rapid up to 24 hours of curing time; beyond 24 hours, the gain in
strength is only moderate. Therefore, heat-curing time need not be more than 24 hours in
practical applications. Heat-curing can be achieved by either steam-curing or dry-curing.

21
 Sivakumar et al. (2014) stated the mechanical properties like compressive, split tensile
and flexural strength will be improved with added of polypropylene fiber. Test results of
Srinivasan showed that 100% GGBS binder composition with 0.25% polypropylene fibers has

shown better performance.

Alehyen et al. (2017) stated the microstructure of geopolymer concrete shows a highly
complex product morphology that consists of unreached, partially reacted, and completely
reacted fly ash spheres that are surrounded by a matrix which also includes quartz crystals and
mullite needles originating from the fly ash. The bigger fly ash particles are almost dissolved or
reduced to smaller size at higher silica content showing denser and finer microstructure as a
result of geo-polymerization, which indicates a higher degree of reaction resulting in increasing
compressive strength. Therefore, the compactness of the microstructure indicates the proper
dissolution of Si and Al due to which good binding has been developed between binder and
aggregates; resulting in higher strength of concrete. However, many of the works related to
microstructure are with geopolymer concrete with fly ash as binding material. Hence it is needed
to understand the microstructure property of geopolymer concrete made with GGBS.
Microstructure also helps to predict the reason for the failure of concrete with durability issues in
different environments.

Palomo, Grutzeck and Blanco investigated the the alkali activation of waste materials.
has become an important area of research in many laboratories because it is possible to use these
materials to synthesize inexpensive and ecologically sound cement like construction materials. In
the present paper, the mechanism of activation of a fly ash (no other solid material was used)
with highly alkaline solutions is described. These solutions, made with NaOH, KOH, water
glass, etc., the product of the reaction is an amorphous aluminosilicate gel Mechanical strength
with values in the 60 MPa range were obtained after curing the fly ash at 85OC for only 5 h.

Anurag, Deepika and his fellows investigated results of an experimental study on the
strength and absorption characteristics of Geopolymer concrete. In this experiment Total nine
mixes were prepared with NaOH concentration as 8M, 12M, 16M and curing time as 24hrs,
48hrs, and 72hrs. Compressive strength, water absorption and tensile strengths tests were
conducted on each of the nine mixes. Results of the investigation indicated that there was an
increase in compressive strength with increase in NaOH concentration. Strength was also
increased with increase in curing time, although the increase in compressive strength after 48hrs

22
curing time was not significant. Compressive strength up to 46 MPa was obtained with curing at
600 C. The results of water absorption test indicated that % water absorption of cubes decreased
with increase in NaOH concentration and curing time.

Parthiban Shobana and his fellows investigate the Chemical Admixture does not show
any impact on Compressive Strength but shows considerable increase inthe workability of the
concrete. The Specimens have been cured in ambient temperature condition to check the
suitability of Geopolymer concrete for cast-in-situ conditions. 7-day strength was found to be
70% of its 28 days strength, the 28 days strength is higher compared to OPC.

Ganapati, Adhiseshu and his fellows investigate replacement of Fly ash for 5 different
GGBS content (upto 40%) and 8M NaOH solution and Na 2SiO3/NaOH ratio was 2.5 taken and
the result indicates that with the increase of Slag content, the compressive Strength of 31.85 at 3
days achieved. From the paper it is also concluded that there is no necessity of Exposing
Geopolymer Concrete to Higher temperature to attain maximum Strength if minimum 9% of
flyash is replaced by GGBS. 90% of compressive Strength was achieved in 14 days and the
average density of Geopolymer. Concrete was equal to that of OPC concrete.

Partha, Prabir and Pradip investigated that the GGBS added to (0 to 20%) of total
binder, significant increase in Strength and some decrease in workability observed on
Geopolymer concrete. The addition of GGBFS enhanced setting of the concrete at ambient
temperature. The strength gain slowed down after the age of 28 days and continues to increase at
a slower rate until 180 days. The effect of mixture variables on the development of tensile
strength was similar to that on the development of compressive strength.

Supraja and Kantarao investigated that in order to produce GGBS added Geopolymer
concrete 14M is taken to prepare different mixes. The Cube Specimens are taken of
150mm×150mm×150mm.Two different curing are carried oven curing at 50C and Direct
Sunlight Curing. The Result shows that there is no significant increase in strength of oven cured
specimens after 3 days of Geopolymer concrete and the strength of Geopolymer concrete is
increasing with the increase of the morality of Sodium Hydroxide. Sunlight curing is more
convenient for practical conditions.

Madheshwaran, Gnansundar, Gopalkrishnan investigated the variation of GGS in

concrete has been studied and Longer curing time improved the Polymerization process and
results in compressive Strength. Higher the Molar Ratio (7 M) with Higher GGBS (100%)results
23
in the Higher Compressive Strength and Split tensile strength.By this compressive Strength in
the range of 45Mpa to 60 Mpa is achieved and Highest is for 100% GGBS. Apart from energy
intensiveness, the GPCs utilize the industrial waste for producing the binding system in concrete,
there are both environment and Economical Benefits of Using Fly ash and GGBS. The addition
of Naphthalene based Super Plasticizer content more than 2% slightly reduce the Compressive
Strength.

Ravindra and Somnath investigated that with the Increase of silica content in flyash, the
size of Spherical shaped unreacted fly ash particles in the Geopolymer matrix indicating
formation of more aluminosilicate gel which results in the increased compressive strength. When
the silica content beyond 4 by (Sio2/Al2o3) leads to reduction in reactivity and decrease in
Strength while lower water content in the mix, Higher was the Compressive Strength. Filler
Material like Sand Reduces cracking and improves the porosity of the Composite and its addition
also reduces the quantity of Binder paste making the material more economical. The Setting time
of Geopolymer is also longer at Higher Silica content.

Pradip and Prabir investigated the Fly ash Geopolymer mixtures were designed adding
GGBFS upto 30% of total Binder and curing is at ambient Temperature. By adding 30% GGBFS
Compressive Strength about 55 MPa has been achieved.The compactness of the Gel increased
when Slag Content is higher in the paste.

Matghew Sudhakar and Natarajan investigated that with the increase of GGBS
content, Compressive Strength is gradually increases .in this Coal Ash and GGBS Combination
is taken along with 15M Alkaline Solution and total replacement of about 30% is taken into
consideration and Higher Compressive Strength up to 57Mpa is achieved .However the Cost of
GGBS added Geopolymer is 7% Higher than OPC but when we Consider Strength aspect, it is
almost 3 times than OPC at 7 days.

24
2.3 PROPERTIES OF GGBS

This GGBS is available in 50 kg bags, obtained from Bellary JSW (Jindal steel) cements
conforming to IS 12089:1987 were used. It is stored in tight bags. The GGBS having specific
gravity 2.6. The Physical and Chemical properties of GGBS are given as follows;

Table 2.1 Properties of GGBS

Property

Appearance Off white to light grey powder with a particle

size lesser than 30 microns (m)

Odour None or slight Sulphur odour

pH 10 – 12

Boiling Point / Range Not applicable

Melting Point / Range >10000C

Flash Point Non – flammable

Flammability Non – flammable

Auto Flammability Non – combustible solid

Explosive Properties None

Oxidizing Properties None

Vapour Pressure Not Applicable

Relative Density 1.8 to 2.4

Water Solubility Slight- less than 1 g/l

Grain on Ignition 0.24

25
2.4 COMPARISON OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES BETWEEN CEMENT AND
GGBS

Table 2.2 Comparison of Physical properties between Cement and GGBS

SL.NO PROPERTY CEMENT GGBS

1 Specific Gravity 3.134 2.98

2 Bulk unit weight 1400 kg/m3 1454.5 kg/m3

3 Fineness 4.2% 2.33%

4 Consistency 24% 31%

5 Initial setting time 33 mins 32 mins

6 Final setting time 600 mins 580 mins

2.5 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF GGBS

The incorporation of ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) in concrete manufacture gains
many advantages which are mentioned below:

 Ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) in concrete increases the strength and
durability of the concrete structure.
 It reduces voids in concrete hence decreasing permeability.
 Ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) gives a workable mix.
 It possesses good pumpable and compaction characteristics.
 The structure made of GGBS constituent helps in increasing sulfate attack resistance.
 The penetration of chloride can be decreased.
 The heat of hydration is less compared to conventional mix hydration.
 The alkali – silica reaction is resisted highly.
 These make the concrete more chemically stable.
 Gives a good surface finish and improves aesthetics.
 The color is more even and light.
 Lower chances of efflorescence.

26
  The maintenance and repair cost of structures is reduced thus increasing the life cycle of
concrete structures.
 Unlike cement, GGBS does not produce carbon dioxide, Sulphur dioxide, or nitrogen
oxides.

GGBS has the following disadvantages in Concrete:

 Additional quality control costs.

 Slow and small hydration heat, not suitable in precast factories or during winter
concreting.
 Faster Carbonation rate decreased service life span due to reinforcement corrosion.
 Carbonation changes pore structure unfavorably with respect to durability.
 Permeability increases at a later age (carbonation).
 The pore structure becomes coarser.
 Salt – freeze durability deteriorates.
 Inferior workability and cohesion in fresh concrete.

2.6 APPLICATION OF GGBS

GGBS is used to make durable concrete structure in combination with ordinary Portland cement
and/ or the other pozzolanic materials like fly ash, silica fumes, usage of GGBS along with OPC
in concrete is recommended in BS 6699:1986, ASTM C989:1982, IS 456:2000, and GGBS to
OPC in the range of 25% - 70% shall be added to manufacture Portland slag cement as per
Indian Standard 455:1989 GGBS can be used for following structures.

 All types of residential and commercial and industrial complexes.

 Dams and other mass concreting works.
 Water retaining structures.
 Concrete roads and flyovers.
 Ideal for use in marine construction.
 Pre – cast concrete products.
 Foundation and piles construction.
 Increased flexibility to meet individual requirements in Ready Mix Concrete.

Table 2.3 Application of GGBS

27
 Si/AI Applications

1 Bricks, Ceramic, Fire protection

2 Low CO2 cements, concrete, radioactive & toxic waste encapsulation

3 Heat resistance composites, foundry equipment, fibre glass composites

>3 Sealants for Industry

20<Si/AI<35 Fire resistance and heat resistance fibre composites

28
 Chapter – 3

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME

29
 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
3.1 MIXING OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

According to Nuruddin et al. mixing process can be divided into two stages, dry mix and wet
mix. Initially coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and GGBS will be mixed together in rotating pan
mixer for 3 to 5 minutes The. alkaline solution is prepared by mixing sodium hydroxide solution
with sodium silicate solution one day before making the geopolymer concrete to get the desired
alkaline solution. The liquid part of the mixture, i.e., the alkaline solution, extra water and the
superplasticizer. should be premixed thoroughly and then added to the dry mixture. The wet
mixing can be done for 1.5 to 3 minutes. The process of mixing is depicted in figure 3. Fresh
geopolymer concrete is then hand mixed to ensure the mixture homogeneity. The aluminosilicate
gel is highly viscous and mixing agitation can easily encapsulate air into the matrix. Mechanical
vibration of the formed molds serves to reduce this potential and greatly improves the overall
strength of the hardened geopolymer concrete.

FINE AGGREGATE COARSE AGGREGATE GGBS

NaOH Solution Extra water as per

design
Prepared PAN
24 hours MIXER
prior
mixing
Superplasticizer

Na2siO3
Wet mix for 3-5
minutes

Geopolymer Concrete

Fig 3.1 Mixing Process of Geopolymer concrete

30
3.2 MIX DESIGN OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

The primary difference between geopolymer concrete and Portland cement concrete is the
binder. To form geopolymer paste alkaline activator solution used to react with silicon and
aluminium oxides which are present in GGBS. This alkaline activator solution helps to bind
coarse aggregate and fine aggregate to form geopolymer mix. The fine and coarse aggregate
occupy nearly 75% to 80% mass of geopolymer concrete. The coarse aggregate was taken as
70% of total aggregate. The density of geopolymer concrete is taken 2400 kg/m 3. The
workability and strength of concrete are influenced by properties of materials that make
geopolymer concrete. The ratio of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide is 2.5 and is kept
constant throughout this study. The ratio of alkaline activator to the GGBS is 0.40 kept constant.

Based on the research papers available on geopolymer concrete, the following ranges were
selected for constituent of the materials and used in the study:

1. Density of Geopolymer concrete as 2400 Kg/m3.

2. Assuming the total aggregate as 77% of the entire mass in Kg/m3.
3. Assuming the alkaline solution to the binder ratio as 0.34

Step 1: Calculation of Total Aggregates (Coarse and Fine Aggregates)

Total Aggregates = 77% of total mass

= 0.77 × 2400 = 1840 Kg/m3

Coarse Aggregate = 70% of total aggregate

= 0.7×1840 = 1295 Kg/m3

Fine Aggregate = 18401295 = 545 Kg/m3

Step 2: Calculation of quantity of Binder and Alkaline solution

Remaining mass = Density of GPCTotal Aggregates = 2400 1840 = 560 Kg/m3

Remaining mass = Geopolymer Paste = alkaline solution = 560 Kg/m3

Alkaline Solution/Binder = 0.34

Binder = 560/1.34 = 415 Kg/m3

Quantity of alkaline solution = GPC paste quantity of Binder = 560  415 = 145 Kg/m3

31
Step 3: Calculation of Proportion of Na2SiO3 + NaOH in alkaline solution

Alkaline Solution = Na2SiO3 + NaOH in alkaline solution

Quantity of NaOH= 145/3.1 = 47 Kg/m3

Na2SiO3/NaOH = 2

[Molecular weight of NaOH = 40]

14M NaOH pellets = 14×40 = 560g

Table 3.1 Typical mix proportion of GGBS based geopolymer Concrete

SL NO. Constituent Wt. for 1m3

1 GGBS 415 kg

2 Coarse Aggregate 20mm – 12.5mm 645 kg

3 Coarse Aggregate 12.5mm – 10mm 370 kg

4 Coarse Aggregate 10mm – 6.3mm 280 kg

5 Fine Aggregate 545 kg

6 Sodium Silicate Solution 92 kg

7 Sodium Hydroxide Solution 47 kg

8 Super Plasticizer 6 kg

3.3 PREPARATION OF ALKALI SOLUTION

The preparation of solution is done by dissolving sodium hydroxide in water. The concentration
of sodium hydroxide changes with molarity. The quantity of sodium hydroxide solution with a
concentration of 14M is calculated the mass of NaOH solids in solution varied depending on the
concentration of the solution expressed in terms of molar, M. The NaOH solution with
concentration of 14M consisted of 14×40 = 560gm of NaOH solids per liter of the solution,
where 40 is the molecular weight of NaOH. The mass of NaOH solids was measured as 306gm
per kg of NaOH solution of 14M concentration. The sodium hydroxide is added to the distilled
water and stirred about fifteen minutes to get cool down. Then the sodium silicate is added to
solution. This solution is used after 24 hours of its preparation.
32
3.4 PREPARATION OF SPECIMENS

3.4.1 Mixing

The alkaline activator solution is prepared before 24 hours of casting. Initially, all dry materials
were mixed properly for minutes. Alkaline activator solution is added slowly to the mixture.
Mixing is done for 5 minutes to get uniform mix.

3.4.2 Casting

Properly mixed geopolymer concrete is poured immediately in to the moulds. Concrete is placed
in three layers by giving more than 25 blows, in order to get fully compacted geopolymer
concrete specimens. Then the top surface is well finished. The size of the mould used are cube
150mm×150mm×150mm.

3.4.3 Curing

After 24 hours moulds were demoulded and were kept in room temperature for curing. The
average temperature recorded during the period of curing was 30 oC. The curing is done for 7
days, 14 days and 28 days.

Material 33 Mould Preparation

and Producing
Preparation Cube
Compressive Curing 7, 14
Strength test and 28 days

Fig 3.2 Flow Chart of Laboratory Work

34
 Chapter – 4

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

35
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 INTRODUCTION

In this section, the main concern is to study the compressive strength of geopolymer concrete
made of GGBS. Concrete tests are conducted on the concrete samples at the specific ages. All
the strength tests are limited in the ages of 7,14 and 28 days.

4.2 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

The most important properties in concrete structure are those related with strength, because the
strength gives an overall picture of the quality of the concrete. Among the various strength types
of concrete strength, compressive strength is the most dominant because the concrete is primarily
meant to withstand compressive stress. Th details of cube samples tested at the ages of 7, 14 and
28 days are shown in the table.

4.3 GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE CUBE STRENGTH

The compressive strength test has become a part of the structural testing in construction to
determine the grade of concrete, which have to comply with design standards. In this study, 25
cubes had been prepared and tested to the required strength of 7, 14 and 28 days.

The main concern of the study Work the compressive strength of geopolymer concrete
contains of the different materials. It’s manufactured by sodium silicate solution and sodium
hydroxide solids with97-98% purity is recommended with GGBS. For water-to-geopolymer
solids ratio by mass of 0.19, the design compressive strength is approximately 45 MPa.

36
 Table 4.1 Result of Compressive Strength for geopolymer concrete made of
GGBS at age of 7 Days

Composition of Mix 7 days Average Average

Compre Compre Compre
Date of Date of
GGBS FA CA NaOH Na2SiO3 Water SP ssive ssive ssive
Casting testing
(kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (ml) Strength Strength Strength
in KN in KN in MPa

660

685

26.05.22 02.06.22 8.5 11 26 1 1.9 1.615 119 720 705 31.33

730

730

The result shows the compressive strength of specimens at a particular age as compared with the
compressive strength of specimen from the same batch of the geopolymer concrete tested on the
day of 7. After the curing age of 7 days the compressive strength of geopolymers concrete made
of GGBS is 31.33 MPa. As known, the geopolymers are members of the inorganic polymers
family. The chemical composition of the geopolymer material is similar to natural zeolitic
materials, but the microstructure is amorphous. The polymerization process involves a
substantially fast chemical reaction under alkaline condition on Si-AI minerals, those results in a
three-dimensional polymeric chain and ring
structure consists of Si-O-AI-O bonds.

The study had been used GGBS with

the alkaline solution to produce geopolymers
concrete. The geopolymer concrete made of
GGBS got good compressive strength at early

37
 age. An overdose of CaO binds almost all the available silica to form weak linear chains,
therefore insufficient silica is left to nucleate the gel.

Table 4.2 Result of Compressive Strength for geopolymer concrete made of

GGBS at age of 14 Days

14 days
Average Average
Compr
Compre Compre
essive
Composition of Mix ssive ssive
Strengt
Date of Date of Strength Strength
h in
Casting testing in KN in MPa
KN

SP
GGBS FA CA NaOH Na2SiO3 Water
(ml
(kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg)
)

735

800

26.05.22 08.06.22 8.5 11 26 1 1.9 1.615 S 830 813 36.13

845

855

The result shows the comparative achieved by the cubes as compared to the compressive strength
of specimens from the same batch of geopolymer concrete tested at the age of 14 days. The
geopolymers concrete made of GGBS was 36.13 MPa (Megapascal). The results show the
compressive strength of the geopolymers concrete made of GGBS harder According to the result,
the compressive strength of the geopolymer concrete made of GGBS is increased with the curing
time about 3.7 MPa. GGBS has 1% Fe2O3. The high Fe2O3 content present in slag may also play
an important role during synthesis, since it may react with the activating solution to form phases

38
 contributing to strength development. Also, the study shows the improvement in the
geopolymers concrete that made of GGBS while duration curing increases from the age of 7 to
14 days; this means that most inorganic polymer bonds are developed in a short time.

Table 4.3 Result of Compressive Strength for geopolymer concrete made of

GGBS at age of 28 Days

28 days Average Average

Compre Compre Compre
Composition of Mix ssive ssive ssive
Date of Date of
Strengt Strength Strength
Casting testing
h in KN in KN in MPa

GGBS FA CA NaOH Na2SiO3 Water SP

(kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (ml)

1150

1160

26.05.22 21.06.22 8.5 11 26 1 1.9 1.615 119 1165 1163.4 51.7

1170

1172

The results show at the age of 28 days, it appears that the compressive strength of the
geopolymer concrete made of GGBS is 51.7 MPa (Mega pascal).On other hand, the compressive
strength geopolymer concrete made of GGBS after curing time of 28 days was more than of 14
days about 15.5MPa. There IS improving in compressive strength geopolymer concrete by using
GGBS with continuing curing time.

39
 Average Compressive Strength
Average Compressive Strength in MPa

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days

Average Compressive Strength

Time in Days

Fig 4.1 Average Compressive Strength in Respective Days

40
 Fig 4.2 Comparison of Compressive Strength of Different Mix in Respective
Days

Chart Title

60

50

40
Compressive Stength in MPa

30

20

10

0
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days

Mix 1 Mix 2 Mix 3 Mix 4 Mix 5

41
EXPERIMENTAL PHOTOGRAPH

42
43
44
 Chapter – 5

GENERAL OBSERVATION AND

CONCLUSION

45
 GENERAL OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION
5.1 INTRODUCTION

This Chapter presents a summary of the present study, the major conclusion, and some
recommendation for future research.

The published literature contained only limited knowledge and know-how on the process of
making GGBS based geopolymer concrete. Most of the literature deals with the use of
metakaolin or calcined kaolin as the source material for making geopolymer paste and mortar.

Moreover, the exact details regarding the mixture compositions and the process of making
geopolymers were kept undisclosed in the patent and commercially oriented research documents.

5.2 CONCLUSION

In this study concluded that progress and current status on the development of Geopolymer
concrete using by-products GGBS. Investigations about GGBS geopolymer have found a
potential material for replacing the used of OPC in infrastructure development. However, it must
be noted that different samples of GGBS may give different reactivity due to their varying
chemical compositions. The current knowledge shows that the influence of NaOH molarity,
alkaline activator ratio, Na2SiO3 / NaOH ratio, and curing temperature are essential for
achieving the optimum strength of geopolymer. Moreover, the durability of the GGBS based
geopolymer is better than OPC when exposed to an aggressive environment.

5.3 RECOMMENDATION

5.3.1 Application

 Geopolymer technology is most advanced in precast applications due to the relative ease
in handling sensitive materials (e.g., high-alkali activating solutions).
 It is also used in precast structural elements and decks as well as structural retrofits using
geopolymer-fiber composites.

5.3.2 Limitation

The followings are the limitations of geopolymer concrete

 High cost for alkaline solution.

 Safety risk associated with the alkalinity of the activating solution.
46
5.4 FUTURE SCOPE

To date, the reaction mechanism of geo-polymerization is still not clear. Fundamental research in
this area would increase the potential of the material. For example, a study is needed to identify
the scientific reason for increase in strength after a longer resting period, and to investigate the
role of water in geo-polymerization. Further research should identify possible applications of
geopolymer technology. This would lead to research areas that are specifically oriented towards
applications. The geopolymer technology has the potential to go beyond making concrete, there
could be possibilities in other areas of infrastructure needed by the community.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
47
1. Bakharev, T, “Thermal behaviour of geopolymers prepared using class F fly ash and
elevated temperature curing”, Cement and Concrete Research, 2006, Vol. 36, pp. 1134-
1147.
2. Bakharev, T, “Durability of geopolymer materials in sodium and magnesium sulfate
solutions”, Cement and Concrete Research, 2005, Vol. 35, pp. 1233-1246.
3. akharev.T, “Resistance of geopolymer materials to acid attack”, Cement and Concrete
Research, 2005, Vol. 35, pp. 658-670.
4. Daniel Kong. L, Jay Sanjayan. G, and Kwesi Sagoe Crentsil, “Comparative performance
of geopolymers made with metakaolin and fly ash after exposure to elevated
temperatures”, Cement and Concrete Research, 2007, Vol. 37, pp. 1583-1589.
5. Deepak Ravikumar, Sulapha Peethamparan and Narayanan Neithalath, “Structure and
strength of NaOH activated concretes containing fly ash or GGBFS as the sole binder”,
Cement and Concrete Composites, 2010, Vol. 32, pp. 399-410.
6. Djwantoro Hardjito, Steenie Wallah, E, Sumajouw, D.M.J., and Vijaya Rangan, B, “On
the Development of Fly Ash-Based 58 Geopolymer Concrete”, ACI Materials Journal,
Vol. 101, No. 6, NovDec -2004, pp. 467-472
7. Djwantoro Hardjito and Tsen, M.Z., “Strength and Thermal stability of fly ash based
geopolymer mortar”, The 3rd International Conference-ACF/VCA, 2008, pp. 144-150.
8. Frantisek Skvara, Josef Dolezal, Pavel Svoboda, Lubomir Kopecky,Simona Pawlasova,
Martin Lucuk, Kamil Dvoracek, Martin Beksa, Lenka Myskova and Rostislav sulc,
“Concrete based on fly ash geopolymer”, The Tenth East Asia-Pacific Conference on
Structural Engineering and Construction, August 3-5, 2006, Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 407-
412.
9. Hardjito. D and Rangan, B.V, “Development and properties of low calcium fly ash based
geopolymer”, Research Report GC1, Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of
Technology, Perth, Australia, 2005, pp. 1-90.
10. Hardjito. D, Wallah, S.E., Sumajouw, D.M.J., and Rangan, B.V., “Properties of
geopolymer concrete with fly ash as source material: Effect of mixture composition”,
Presented at the Seventh CANMET/ACI International Conference on Recent Advances in
Concrete Technology, Las Vegas, USA,2004, pp.109-118. 59
11. IS: 1727 – 1967, “Methods of test for Pozzolanic materials”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi.

48
12. IS: 2386 – 1963, “Methods of test for aggregates for concrete”, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
13. IS: 516 – 1959, “Method of test for strength of concrete”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi.
14. Mourougane.R, Puttappa C.G., Sashidhar.C, and Muthu, K.U., “Production and Material
Properties of high strength Geopolymer concrete”, International Conference on Advances
in Materials and Techniques in civil Engineering (ICAMAT 2010), Jan- 2010, pp. 201-
204.
15. Naik, H.K., Mishra, M.K., and Beher, B, “Laboratory Investigation and Characterization
of Some Coal Combustion Byproducts for their Effective Utilization”, 1st International
Conference on Managing the social and Environmental consequences of coal mining in
India, New Delhi, November- 2007, pp 1-10.
16. Suresh Thokchom, Partha Ghosh and Somnath Ghosh, “Acid Resistance of Fly ash based
Geopolymer mortars” International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1,
No.6, May -2009, pp. 36-40. 60
17. Vijaya Rangan, B, “Studies on low-calcium fly ash based geopolymer concrete”, ICI
Journal, Oct-Dec- 2006, pp. 9-17.
18. Vijay, K, Kumutha ,R, and Vishnuram, B.G., “Influence of curing types on strength of
Geopolymer concrete”, International Conference on Advances in Materials and
Techniques in civil Engineering (ICAMAT 2010), Jan-2010, pp. 291-294.
19. Wallah, S.E., Hardjito, D, Sumajouw, D.M.J., and Rangan, B.V., “Performance of
Geopolymer Concrete Under Sulfate Exposure”, Presented at the Seventh CANMET/ACI
International Conference on Recent Advances in Concrete Technology, Las Vegas, USA,
2004, pp. 27-36.
20. Wallah. S.E., and Rangan. B.V., “Low –calcium fly ash based geopolymer concrete: long
term properties”, Research Report GC2, Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of
Technology, Perth, Australia, 2006, pp. 1-97.
21. Zhang, Y.S., Sun, W, and Li, J.Z., “Hydration process of interfacial transition in
potassium polysialate (K-PSDS) geopolymer concrete”, Magazine of Concrete Research,
Vol. 57, No.1, February-2005, pp.

49