CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

Now a days usage of concrete occupies second place around the world other than the
water. ordinary Portland concrete primarily consists of cement, aggregates (coarse & fine) and
water. Due to increasing of developments in infrastructure, the usage of conventional concrete
(CC) will be more and as well as the demand of cement would be increased in the future.
Approximately it is estimated that the consumption of cement is more than 2.2 billion tons per
year (Malhotra, 1999).

It is widely known that concrete is the most widely used constructing material and
Portland cement is one of the ingredient used in the concrete. Mainly the production of Portland
cement takes considerable energy, due to that it releases large volume of carbon dioxide (Co2)
into the atmosphere. The climate change is mainly concerned with the global warming.
Generally the various greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (Co2), methane, nitrous oxide are
releasing into the atmosphere due to various human activities. These gases are mainly
responsible for global warming. Many industries are releasing Co2 into the atmosphere, in those
cement industry also playing one of the role. Generally the one ton of Co2 is approximately
releasing due to the production of one ton of Portland cement. However in concrete
construction, Portland cement is one of the main binder. So, we have to search for more
environmental friendly materials.

There are many attempts are under research for the replacement of Portland cement with
other cementitious materials such as fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), rice-
husk, in order to reduce global warming issues. Fly ash is the by-product of burning coal that is
accessible at worldwide. It is being used for replacement of Portland cement in concrete. High
calcium fly ash or ASTM class C ash possess the self binding properties. Low calcium fly ash or
class F fly ash possesses pozzolanic properties.

Davidovits (1978), had developed alternative binder “geopolymer” that contains

cementing properties. So, it can be used as replacement of cement. A geopolymer will be created

JNTUCEA Page 1
by the combining of aluminosilicate material with high alkalic liquids. Usually geopolymer will
be made up of the materials that contain Al (Al) and oxide (Si) content. Fly ash and ground
granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) are rich in Al and oxide content. So, these can be used for
replacing the cement in concrete.

1.2 Geo-polymers

There are two major constituents present in the geopolymers, namely the alkaline liquids
and source materials. The alkaline liquid used in geopolymerisation process is a mixture of
Sodium hydroxide (NaoH) and Sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) or potassium hydroxide (KOH) and
potassium silicate (K2SiO3). The source materials used for geopolymers are based on percentage
of silica (Si) and aluminium (Al) present in the material. Fly ash, silica fume, ground granulated
blast furnace slag (GGBS), rise husk ash etc., could be used as source materials. The selection of
source materials is mainly based on requirement, cost, users demand etc.
The schematic structure of geopolymer material can be shown in Equations (1) and (2)
(Davidovits, 1994; van Jaarsveld et al., 1997) [3]:
n(Si2o5,Al2o2)+2nSiO2+4nH2o+KOH or KOH → Na+, K+ + n(oH)3-Si-o-Al--o-Si-(oH)3
(Si-Al materials) │
(oH)2 (1)
(Geopolymer precursor)
n(oH)3-Si-o-Al--o-Si-(oH)3 + KOH or KOH → (Na+, K+)-(-Si-o-Al--o-Si-o-) + 4nH2o
│ │ │ │
(oH)2 o o o (2)
(Geopolymer backbone)
The above chemical reaction may consist of the following steps (Davidovits 1999; Xu and van
Deventer 2000):

 Dissolution of Si and Al atoms from the source material through the action of hydroxide
ions.

 Transportation or condensation or orientation of precursor ions into monomers.

 Polymerisation of monomers into polymeric structures.

JNTUCEA Page 2
However, the above three steps can overlap with each other and occur almost simultaneously,
thus making it difficult to isolate and examine each of them separately (Palomo et al. 1999).

A geopolymer can take one of the three basic forms (Davidovits 1999):

 Poly (sialate), which has [-Si-o-Al-o-] as the repeating unit.

 Poly (sialate-siloxo), which has [-Si-o-Al-o-Si-o-] as the repeating unit.

 Poly (sialate-disiloxo), which has [-Si-o-Al-o-Si-o-Si-o-] as the repeating unit.

Sialate is an abbreviation of silicon-oxo-aluminate.

From equation (2), it reveals that the last term i.e., water (H2o) is released during the
chemical reaction that occurs in the formation of geopolymers. This water, removed from the
geopolymer matrix during the curing and further drying periods, leaves behind discontinuous
nano-pores in the matrix, which provide benefits to the performance of geopolymers.

1.2.1 Constituents of Geopolymer

1.2.1.1 Source materials
In the present investigation the following materials are used as source materials.
a) Fly ash
b) Ground Granulated Blast furnace Slag

a) Fly ash
Fly ash (ASTM Class F) is used in the manufacturing of geopolymer concrete and which
is obtained from the by-product of coal-burning power stations. The production of fly ash will be
increased day by day in our country, so it is best opportunity to employ this by-product in the
geopolymer concrete. Approximately it is estimated that the production of fly ash is more than
780 million tons per year especially in the countries like China and India (Malhotra, 2002). So,

JNTUCEA Page 3
the abundant availability of fly ash may create the good opportunity to employ in the
manufacturing of geopolymer concrete (GPC).

b) Ground Granulated Blast furnace Slag (GGBS)

Ground granulated blast furnace slag is also one of the source materials used in the
manufacturing of geopolymer concrete and which is obtained by the blast furnace used to make
iron. GGBS is used in the ordinary Portland concrete either in the form of mineral admixture or
in the form of constituent of blended cement. ordinary Portland cement is typically replaced by
35 to 65% of the GGBS. It improves strength and durability properties of the concrete and also
increases the service life of concrete structures.
on the other hand, the usage of ground granulated blast furnace slag may create some
environmental benefits such as it produces less quantity of carbon dioxide as compare to the
ordinary Portland cement. It also gives better workability (i.e., easy to mixing, transporting,
placing and compacting etc).

c) SLAG
As by-products of the metallurgical industry, the chemical composition, structure and
properties of slag vary depending on the source, i.e. iron blast-furnace slag ar hydraulic while
nickel and copper slag have only pozzolanic properties due to the lack of lime and therefore they
need to react with lime before become hydraulic (Regourd, 1986) .
The most common cementitious materials for AAS binder is iron blast-furnace slag and
it is the only material to be used worldwide for the production of AAS binder using local
sources (Al-otaibi, 2008; Bakharev, et al., 1999a; Bougara,Lynsdale, & Ezziane, 2009: Douglas
& Brandstetr, 1990; Fernandez-Jimenez,Palomo, & Puertas, 1999; Gjorv, 1989; Krizan &
Zivanovic, 2002; Ling, Pei, &Yan, 2004; Shi & Day, 1996; Wang & Scrivener, 1995; Zivica,
2007). Althoughother types of slag such as phosphorus slag (Shi & Li, 1989), red mud slag
(Gong& Yang, 2000; Pan, et al., 2002) can also be activated, however as theirhydraulic activity
is not as high as iron blast-furnace slag, their activation is not aseffective as iron blast-furnace
slag.

JNTUCEA Page 4
1.2.1.2 Alkaline Liquids

The combination of Potassium hydroxide (KOH) and Potassium silicate solution

(K2SiO3) are used as alkaline liquids. The Potassium silicate solution (K2o= 13.7%,

SiO2=29.4%, and water (H2o) =55.9% by mass) was prepared by the manufacturer of required
quantities. The Potassium hydroxide (KOH) in flakes or pellets from with 97%-98% purity was
used in the investigation. The Potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution was prepared by dissolving
either the flakes or the pellets in required quantity of water. The mass of Potassium hydroxide
solids in a solution varied depending on the concentration of the solution expressed in terms of
molarity (M). For instance, KOH solution with a concentration of 10M consisted of 10x40 = 400
grams of KOH solids (in flake or pellet form) per litre of the solution, where, 40 is the molecular
weight of Potassium hydroxide (KOH) pellets or flakes.

1.2.2 Applications of Geopolymers

 Used in industrial floor repairs.
 Airfield repairs (in war zones).
 Fireproof composite panels.
 External repair and structural retrofit for aging infrastructure.
 For storage of toxic and radioactive wastes.
 Potential utilizations in Art and Decoration.
 LTGS Brick, railways sleepers, electric power poles, marine structures, waste
containments etc..

Depending on the molar ratio of Si to Al, the possible applications of geopolymers were
proposed by Davidovits (1999) as given in Table 1.1.

JNTUCEA Page 5
 Table 1.1. Applications of Geopolymers

Si:Al Application

- Bricks
1 - Ceramics
- Fire protection

- Low Co2 cements and concretes

2
- Radioactive and toxic waste encapsulation

- Fire protection fibre glass composite

- Foundry equipments
3
- Heat resistant composites, 2000C to 100ooC
- TOoling for aeronautics titanium process

- Sealants for industry, 2000C to 600oC

>3
- TOoling for aeronautics SPF aluminium

20-35 - Fire resistant and heat resistant fibre composites

1.2.3 Advantages of Geopolymers

Geopolymer concrete is more resistant to corroSiOn and fire, has compressive and tensile
strengths, gains its full strength quickly (cures fully faster), low creep, no shrinkage, good acid
resistance, low permeability, resistant to sulphate attack and durable finishes.

1.3 Aim of the Project

The main objective of this project is to reduce the carbon dioxide (Co2) emisSiOns into the
atmosphere and also to develop and study the strength characteristics of fly ash and GGBS based
geopolymer concrete at ambient room temperature curing.

Based on the background of this project, the aims of this project are as follows:

JNTUCEA Page 6
 1. TO develop the strength parameters of geopolymer concrete made with fly ash and GGBS
with various proportions.

2. TO study the engineering properties of low calcium fly ash and GGBS based geopolymer
concrete.

1.4 Scope of work

The research utilized fly ash (ASTM Class F) and ground granulated blast furnace slag
(GGBS) in the development of GPC. Potassium hydroxide and Potassium silicate solution are
used as alkaline activators. The geopolymer concrete properties studied in this study are the
compressive strength, split tensile strength, flexural strength at different curing periods.
1.5 Thesis arrangement
The remainder of the thesis is arranged as follow:
Chapter-1 describes the brief introduction about geopolymer, constituents of geopolymer,
applications and advantages of geopolymer concrete, aim of the project and finally discuss about
scope of work.
Chapter-2 describes a brief literature review. This chapter describes in detail the various types
of works carried out by the researchers to understand the behavior of geopolymer concrete.
Chapter-3 describes the materials and methods of tests which are conducting the geopolymer
concrete. The tests performed to study the mechanical properties of the hardened geopolymer
concrete are described.
Chapter-4 describes the results and discusSiOn of the experiments conducted on the geopolymer
concrete.
Chapter-5 describes the overall concluSiOns made in the project and suggestions of future
work. The thesis ends with a Reference List and two Appendices.

JNTUCEA Page 7
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

This Chapter presents the historical background of the geopolymer concrete,

Terminology and Chemistry of the geopolymers. The study of literature survey corresponding to
the geopolymer concrete technology has done in this chapter.

2.1 Historical Background

The phenomenal durability of ancient concretes and mortars compared to those being
used in modern time prompted research into the nature of these ancient compounds. Results
from various studies, summarized by Davidovits, [6] proved that there is in fact a very distinct
difference between ancient mortars and the Portland cement-based building materials in use
today. The ancient products seem to be not only physically more durable, but also more resistant
to acid attack and freeze-thaw-cycles. Initially it was thought that this difference is the
consequence of calcium silicate hydrates (of the C-S-H-gel type) which constitute the main part
of Portland cement. Later, however, it was discovered that these ancient concretes also contain
amounts of C-S-H gel and consequently researchers turned their attention to the large amounts
of zeolitic phases also found in the ancient products [6]. It was later concluded that the long term
durability of ancient mortars is the result of high levels of zeolitic and amorphous compounds in
their compositional make-up.
The use of pozzolanic materials in the manufacture of concrete has a long, successful
history. In fact, their use pre-dates the invention of modern day Portland cement by almost 200
years. Today, most concrete producers worldwide recognize the value of pozzolanic
enhancements to their products and, where they are available; they are becoming a basic concrete
ingredient. Mineral admixtures such as ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), fly ash and
silica fume are commonly used in concrete because they improve durability reduce porosity and
improve the interface with the aggregate. Economics (lower cement requirement), energy, and
environmental considerations have had a role in the mineral admixture usage as well as better
engineering and performance properties. The lower cement requirement also leads to a reduction
for Co2 generated by the production of cement. The engineering benefits from the use of mineral

JNTUCEA Page 8
admixtures in concrete result partly from their particle size distribution characteristics, and partly
from the pozzolanic and cementations reactivity. Experimental programs conducted with the
purpose of proving this theory partly resulted in the rediscovery of a new family of mineral
binders named "Geopolymers" because of similarities with organic condensation polymers as far
as their hydrothermal synthesis conditions were concerned.

2.1.1 Concrete and environment

The emisSiOn of carbon dioxide (Co2) in to the atmosphere is the main cause of green
house effect. Many industries including cement industries release lots of carbon dioxide in to the
atmosphere, as the greenhouse effect created by these emisSiOns it results into increase in the
global temperature that may result in climate changes. As cement is widely used as a binder
material in the construction field all over the world, its production is increasing by 3% annually
(McCaffrey 2002). The production of one ton of cement liberates about one ton of Co2 to the
atmosphere which causes global warming. Among all the green house gas emisSiOns, into the
atmosphere, emisSiOns from cement production only is estimated about 7%. The Cement
manufacturing plants of all over world release about 1.35 billion tons of carbon-dioxide in to
atmosphere annually (Malhotra 2002). After aluminium and steel, cement is one of the energy-
intensive construction materials. Furthermore, it has been noticed that the durability
characteristics of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) concrete is under testing, as many concrete
structures, these built in corrosive environments, start to deteriorate after 2o to 30 years, even
though they have been designed for more than 50 years of service life (Mehta, 2002). In order to
produce environmentally friendly concrete, Mehta (2002) proposed the advantages of some
natural resources, lower energy and minimise carbon dioxide emisSiOns.

Many attempts are in process to continue the use of Portland cement in concrete to notice
the global warming problems.In order to develope the similar binding materials to ordinary
portland cement, we will use the rice-husk, fly ash, metakaolin and ground granulated blast
furnace slag. In this respect, the geopolymer concepts presents some of applications in cement
factories as an similar binder to the ordinary Portland cement (Duxson et al, 2007). Inorder to
control the global warming effects, the geopolymer studies should minimize the releasing of Co2

JNTUCEA Page 9
into the atmosphere due to the cement industries as shown by the detailed analyses of Gartner
(2004).

2.2 Terminology

Davidovits, created and applied the term Geopolymer. For the chemical designation of
geopolymers based on silico-aluminates, "Poly (sialate)" was suggested. Sialate is an
abbreviation for silicon-oxo-aluminate.
Although the mechanism of polymerization is yet to be fully understood, a critical
feature is that water is present only to facilitate workability and does not become a part of the
resulting geopolymer structure. In other words, water is not involved in the chemical reaction
and instead is expelled during curing and subsequent drying. This is in contrast to the hydration
reactions that occur when Portland cement is mixed with water, which produce the primary
hydration products calcium silicate hydrate and calcium hydroxide. This difference has a
significant impact on the mechanical and chemical properties of the resulting geopolymer
concrete, and also renders it more resistant to heat, water ingress, alkali-aggregate reactivity, and
other types of chemical attack (Davidovits 2008; Lloyd and Rangan 2009), [9&1o].
The chemical composition of the geopolymer material is similar to natural zeolitic
materials, but the microstructure is amorphous instead of crystalline (Palomo et al. 1999; Xu and
van Deventer 2000, [11]. The polymerisation process involves a substantially fast chemical
reaction under alkaline condition on Si-Al minerals, which results in a three dimenSiOnal
polymeric chain and ring structure consisting of Si-o-Al-o bonds, as follows (Davidovits 1999),
[12]:
Mn [-(SiO2) z-A102] n. wH2o (2-1)
Where:
M = the alkaline element or cation such as potassium, Potassium or calcium; the symbol -
indicates the presence of a bond, n is the degree of polycondensation or polymerisation; z is l, 2,
3, or higher, up to 32.

JNTUCEA Page 10
2.3 Literature review on Geopolymer Concrete

Rangan (2008) has reported on the fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. He study the effects of
salient factors that influence the short and long term properties of the geopolymer concrete in the fresh
and hardened states. He describes the applications and economic merits of geopolymer concrete in the
construction industry. He finally concluded that the low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete
has excellent compressive strength and is suitable for structural applications. The salient factors that
influence the short and long term properties of the fresh concrete and the hardened concrete have been
identified.

Sumajouw and Rangan (2006) have reported on the low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer
concrete: reinforced beams and columns. This Research Report describes the behaviour and strength of
reinforced low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete structural beams and columns, the
development, the mixture proportions, the short-term properties, and the long-term properties of low-
calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Heat-cured low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete
has excellent compressive strength, suffers very little drying shrinkage and low creep, excellent resistance
to sulfate attack, and good acid resistance

Hardjito and Rangan (2005) made an investigation on the development and properties
of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. The report describes the short, long term
properties of fly ash based geopolymer concrete and strength behavior of structural beams and
columns. They studied the strength properties by using fly ash as the cementanious material in
the concrete.

They concludes that increase in the concentration levels of Sodium hydroxide and ratio of
sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide results the higher compressive strength of geopolymer
concrete and also recommended the usage of super plasticizer (naphthalene sulphonate) is
optimum up to 2% of fly ash by mass.

Supraja and Kanta Rao (2011) have investigated the geopolymer concrete is fully
replaced with Ground Granulated Blast furnace Slag (GGBS) and alkaline liquids are used for
the binding of materials. Different molarities of the Potassium hydroxide solution i.e. 3M, 5M,
and 7M and 9M are taken to prepare different mixes and studied the mechanical properties of
geopolymer concrete. Two different curing are carried i.e. oven curing at 50o-degree centigrade

JNTUCEA Page 11
and curing directly by placing the specimens to direct sunlight. He observed that the compressive
strength is increased with the increase in the molarities of Potassium hydroxide. The oven cured
specimens gave best results as compared to specimens cured by direct sunlight, oven cured
specimens gives the higher compressive strength. He recommended that sunlight curing is
convenient for practical conditions.

Ganapati Naidu et al. (2012) have studied the strength properties of geopolymer
concrete using low calcium fly ash (ASTM Class F) replacing with slag in 5 different
percentages of o, 9, 16.66, 23.07 and 28.57. He observed that the compressive strength of
geopolymer concrete increases with replacement of fly ash with GGBS. Fly ash was replaced by
ground granulated blast furnace slag up to 28.57%, beyond that fast setting was observed. He
observed 90% of compressive strength was achieved within 14 days.

Khadar et al. (2014) have study the strength properties of class F fly ash (FA) based
geopolymer concrete (GPC) using slag as sand replacement at different levels (o%, 50% and
100%). Sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) and sodium hydroxide (NaoH) solution has been used as an
alkaline activator. In the present investigation, it is proposed to study the mechanical properties
viz. compressive strength after 7, 14 and 28 days and split tensile strength after 28 days of
ambient room temperature curing.

From the results, it is concluded that the increased replacement level of slag increased the
mechanical properties of FA based GPC mixes. Results recommended using fly ash based GPC
mixes using slag as a sand replacement.

Priyanka et al. (2014) reported that the effect of molarity (8M, 10M and 12M) on
strength properties of fly ash (class F) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) blended
geopolymer concrete (GPC) at the 50% replacement level (FA50-GGBS50). Sosdum silicate
(Na2SiO3) and Sodium hydroxide (NaoH) solution has been used as an alkaline activator. In the
present investigation, it is proposed to study the mechanical properties viz. compressive strength
after 7, 14 and 28 days and split tensile strength after 28 days of ambient room temperature
curing.

JNTUCEA Page 12
 From the results, it is concluded that the increased molarity of NaoH solution increased
the compressive strength of GPC at all curing periods and split tensile strength after 28 days of
curing. Results revealed that fly ash and GGBS blended GPC mixes have attained enhanced
mechanical properties at all curing periods.

Wallah and Rangan (2006) conducted work on the long term properties of low-calcium
fly ash based geopolymer concrete. They reported that, there was no substantial gain in the
compressive strength of heat-cured fly ash based geopolymer concrete with age, heat-cured fly
ash based geopolymer concrete undergoes low creep and little drying shrinkage after one year
and had excellent resistance against sulphate attack, even after one year of exposure. They also
reported that, exposure of geopolymer concrete to the sulphuric acid solution, resulted in
degradation of compressive strength as well as damaged the surface of the heat-cured
geopolymer concrete. Mass loss of about 3% was observed, after one year of exposure. However,
the sulphuric acid resistance of heat-cured geopolymer concrete was significantly better than of
cement concrete.

Venkatesh babu and Divya mohan (2005) studied the strength properties of fly ash
based geopolymer concrete-concrete without cement. They investigated the performance
characteristics of source materials, strength and microstructural properties of geopolymer
concrete. The variables considered in their study were the molarity of chemical activators and the
ratio of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide. The result shows that as the molarity and the ratio
of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide increase the compressive strength of GPC also increases.
The maximum compressive strength of 25.50 Mpa was obtained, within 24 hours by oven curing
at 90°C temperature

Kedarswamy (2007) has studied the performance of geopolymer concrete at elevated

temperature. He had exposed the specimens to a temperature of 250°C, 400°C, 600°C and 800°C
for a sustained duration of 2 hours and 4 hours. His study showed that there is considerable
reduction in strength to an extent of 65% at 250°C and 400°C at much higher rate beyond the
rate of reduction in strength reduces with the increase in temperature, 74% Up to 600°C and 77%
up to 800°C. The tests indicated that up to 250°C the reduction in strength is linear.

JNTUCEA Page 13
 Satia et al. (2008) the objective of the present work is to study the fly ash based
geopolymer prepared with sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide as alkaline activators. The
concrete was prepared with varying fly ash content 350,450 and 550 kg/m3 and activator
solution to fly ash ratio of 0.40 and 0.50. The compressive strength in the range of 10-60 Mpa
was obtained. The performance of these concrete in aggressive environment was also studied,
using tests on absorption, acid resistance and potential. Results indicated that water absorption
decreased with increase in strength of concrete and fly ash content. All Geopolymer concrete
showed excellent resistance to acid attack compared to conventional concrete.

Rajamane et al. (2011) a compressive literature survey on various aspects of

Geopolymer concrete has been provided in this paper to understand the nature of GPC from
engineering applications point of view so that a rational technical plan for development for GPC
with aluminosilicate sources (Fly ash, Ground Granulated Blast furnace slag) can be formulated.
The literature survey indicates that Geopolymer is the only one of many names used for
describing the binder formed aluminosilicate gel structure. Comparatively, more paper published
on a science of geo polymerisation where often paste is utilised. Concrete and mortar based
Geopolymer are also reported, but lesser in numbers. The science of geopolymer has not reached
the stage where geopolymer concrete mix can be made by the user just adding the water as it
happens in the case of Portland cement technology. This requires actual Engineers onsite to be
aware of the chemical nature of geopolymer binding action involved. However, enough
qualitative information is on mechanical strength so that geopolymer concrete mixes can be
developed to achieve the desired level of strength for use in the structure. The second part of the
paper would concentrate on typical research plan to develop the engineering properties of GPC
based information available in the literature.

Sanjay Kumar et al. (2005) worked on high strength Geopolymeric materials through
mechanical activation of fly ash. They prepared fly ash based geopolymers using raw and
mechanically activated fly ash. A remarkably higher strength was observed in mechanically
activated fly ash based geopolymers, the compressive strength also increases with an increase in
alkaline activator. Depending upon the mechanical activation device used, geopolymers having
compressive strength in the range of 45-120 Mpa could be prepared. TGA/DTA studies indicated

JNTUCEA Page 14
the greater formation of geopolymerisation product in case of mechanically activated fly ash and
this was supported by a compact microstructure during SEM examination of the samples.

JNTUCEA Page 15
 CHAPTER 3
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
3.1 General
This Chapter presents the details of development of the process of making low calcium
(ASTM Class F) fly as based geopolymer concrete using slag as sand replacement. First, the
materials, mixture proportions, manufacturing and curing of the test specimens are explained.
This is then followed by the test procedures. As far as possible, the current practice used in the
manufacture and testing of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) concrete was followed. The aim of
this action was to ease the promotion of this ‘new’ material to the concrete construction industry.
The parameter compressive strength is the important factor in any concrete structures. Based on
the compressive strength, the development process is improved.

The physico chemical properties of fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag,
aggregate and water used in the investigation were analyzed based on standard experimental
procedures laid down in IS, ASTM and BS codes. The experiments conducted on coarse
aggregate (Hard Broken Granite, HBG) are specific gravity and water absorption, Bulk density
& Sieve analysis. The experiments conducted on fine aggregate (sand and granite fines) are
specific gravity, moisture content, sieve analysis and bulking of fine aggregate using volume
method. The tests conducted on geopolymer concrete are Compressive strength, Split Tensile
strength5 and Flexural strength as per the respective IS, BS and ASTM codes.

3.2 Materials
3.2.1 Fly ash
According to ASTM C 618 (2003) the fly ash can be divided into two types based on
amount of calcium present in the Fly ash. The classified Fly ashes are Class F (low-calcium) and
Class C (high-calcium). In the Present investigation Class F fly ash produced from Rayalaseema
Thermal Power Plant (RTPP), Muddanur, and A.P was used. The chemical and physical
properties are presented in the Table 3.1

JNTUCEA Page 16
3.2.2 Slag
In the present investigation, slag produced from the Lanco Industries was used as sand
replacement at different levels (o%,50% and 100%) in the manufacturing of GPC. The chemical
and physical properties are presented in the Table 3.1
Table 3.1 Chemical and Physical Properties of Class F Fly Ash and GGBS

Class ASTM C 618

Particulars
“F” fly ash Class “F” fly ash GGBS
Chemical
composition
% Silica(SiO2) 65.6 30.61
% Alumina(Al2O3) 28.0 16.24

% Iron oxide(Fe2O3) 3.0 SiO2+ Al2o3+ Fe2o3>70 0.584

% Lime(CaO) 1.0 34.48

% Magnesia(MgO) 1.0 6.79

% Titanium oxide 0.5 -

(Tio2)
% Sulphur Trioxide 0.2 Max. 5.0 1.85
(So3)
Loss on Ignition 0.29 Max. 6.0 2.1

Physical properties

Specific gravity 2.24 2.86

Fineness (m2/Kg) 360 Min.225 m2/kg 400

3.2.3 Coarse aggregate

Crushed granite stones of size 20 mm and 10 mm of coarse aggregate are used. The
bulk specific gravity in oven dry condition and water absorption of the coarse aggregate 20 mm
and 10mm as per IS code were 2.60 and 0.3% respectively.

JNTUCEA Page 17
 The gradation of the coarse aggregate was determined by sieve analysis as per IS code
and presented in the Tables 3.2 and 3.3. The grading curves of the coarse aggregates as per IS
code are shown in Fig 3.1 and 3.2. (Quantity taken=5 Kg)
Table 3.2 Sieve analysis of 20 mm Coarse aggregate
Cumulative percent
Sieve
passing
S.No size
IS 383 (1970)
(mm) 20 mm
Limits

1 2o 91.88 85-100

2 16 45.22 N/A

3 12.5 18.6 N/A

4 1o 6.86 o-2o

5 4.75 0.18 o-5

Table 3.3 Sieve analysis of 10 mm Coarse aggregate

Cumulative percent
Sieve
passing
S.No size
10 IS 383
(mm)
mm (1970) limits

1 1o 99.56 85-100

2 4.75 9.67 o-2o

3 2.36 2.2 o-5

JNTUCEA Page 18
 120
Lower Limit (IS
393:1970)
100 Coarse Aggregate
Percentage Passing

80

60

40

20

0
0.1 1 10 100
IS Seive Size (mm)

Fig. 3.1 Grading curve of 20 mm Coarse aggregate

120
Lower Limit (IS
100 393:1970)
Percentage Passing

80

60

40

20

0
0.1 1 10 100
IS Seive Size (mm)

Fig. 3.2 Grading curve of 10 mm Coarse aggregate

JNTUCEA Page 19
3.2.4 Fine aggregate
The sand used throughout the experimental work was obtained locally in Anantapuramu
district. The bulk specific gravity in oven dry condition and water absorption of the sand as per
IS code were 2.60 and 1% respectively. The gradation of the sand was determined by sieve
analysis as per IS code and presented in the Table 3.4. The grading curve of the fine aggregate as
per IS code is shown in Fig. 3.3. Fineness modulus of sand was 2.56. (Quantity taken=1 Kg)

Table 3.4 Sieve analysis of Fine Aggregate (Sand)

Cumulative percent passing

Sieve No/ size IS 383 (1970) –
S.No Fine
Zone II
aggregate
requirement

1 3/8” (10mm) 100 100

2 N0.4 (4.75mm) 98.6 90-100

3 N0.8 (2.36mm) 95.83 75-100

4 N0.16 (1.18mm) 80.7 55-90

5 N0.30 (600μm) 44.2 35-59

6 N0.50 (300μm) 18.2 8-30

7 N0.100 (150μm) 2.9 0-10

JNTUCEA Page 20
 110
Lower Limit (IS
100 383:1970)
90 Fine Aggregate
Percentage Passing

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
IS Seive Size (mm)

Fig. 3.3 Grading curve of fine aggregate

3.2.5 Alkaline Liquid
The alkaline liquid used was a combination of Potassium silicate solution and
Potassium hydroxide solution. The Potassium silicate solution (K2o= 13.7%, SiO2=29.4%, and
water=55.9% by mass) was purchased from a local supplier. The Potassium hydroxide (KOH) in
flakes or pellets from with 97%-98% purity was also purchased from a local supplier. The
Potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution was prepared by dissolving either the flakes or the pellets
in required quantity of water. The mass of KOH solids in a solution varied depending on the
concentration of the solution expressed in terms of molarity, M. For instance, KOH solution with
a concentration of 10M consisted of 10x40 = 400 grams of KOH solids (in flake or pellet form)
per litre of the solution, where, 40 is the molecular weight of Potassium hydroxide (KOH) pellets
or flakes.
3.3 Mixture Proportions
Based on the limited past research on GPC (Hardjito & Rangan, 2005), the following
proportions were selected for the constituents of the mixtures [1-5].

 The combined mass of coarse and fine aggregates has taken as 77% of the mass of
concrete.
 Alkaline liquid as given in Section 3.2.5.

JNTUCEA Page 21
  Ratio of activator solution-to-fly ash and GGBS, by mass, in the range of 0.3 and 0.4.
This ratio was fixed at 0.35.
 Class F fly ash and SLAG replacement levels (FA100o-SLAG0; FA100-SLAG50&
FA100o-SLAG100).
 Ratio of Potassium silicate solution-to-Potassium hydroxide solution, by mass, of 0.4 to
2.5. This ratio was fixed at 2.5 for most of the mixtures, because the Potassium silicate
solution is considerably cheaper than the Potassium hydroxide solution.
 Molarity of Potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution was kept at 10M.
 Calculate water-to-geopolymer solids.
 Extra water, when added, in mass.
The following scenario describes the GPC mix design of the present study:

Assume that normal-density aggregates in SSD (Saturated surface Dry) condition are to
be used and the unit-weight of concrete is 2400 kg/m3. In this study, take the mass of combined
aggregates as 77% of the total mass of concrete, i.e. 0.77x2400=1848 kg/m3. The coarse and fine
(combined) aggregates may be selected to match the standard grading curves used in the design
of Portland cement concrete mixtures.

For instance, the coarse aggregates (70%) may comprise 776 kg/m3 (60%) of 20 mm
aggregates, 518 kg/m3 (40%) of 10 mm aggregates, and 554 kg/m3 (30%) of fine aggregate to
meet the requirements of standard grading curves. The adjusted values of coarse and fine
aggregates are 774 kg/m3 of 20 mm aggregates, 516 kg/m3 of 10 mm aggregates and 549 kg/m3
(30%) of fine aggregate, after considering the water absorption values of coarse and fine
aggregates.

The mass of geopolymer binders (fly ash )and the alkaline liquid = 2400 – 1848 = 552
kg/m3. Take the alkaline liquid-to-fly ash ratio by mass as 0.35; the mass of fly ash = 552/
(1+0.35) = 409 kg/m3 and the mass of alkaline liquid = 552 – 409 = 143 kg/m3. Take the ratio of
Potassium silicate (K2SiO3) solution-to-Potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution by mass as 2.5; the
mass of Potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution = 144/ (1+2.5) = 41 kg/m3; the mass of Potassium
silicate solution = 143 – 41 =102 kg/m3.

JNTUCEA Page 22
 The Potassium hydroxide solids (KOH) is mixed with water to make a solution with a
concentration of 10 Molar. This solution comprises 40% of KOH solids and 60% water, by mass.
For the trial mixture, water-to-geopolymer solids ratio by mass is calculated as follows:
In Potassium silicate solution, water = 0.559x102 = 57 kg, and solids = 102 – 57 = 45 kg. In
Potassium hydroxide solution, solids = 0.40x41 = 16 kg, and water = 41 – 16 = 25 kg. Therefore,
total mass of water = 57+25 = 82 kg, and the mass of geopolymer solids = 409 (i.e. mass of fly
ash and GGBS) + 45 + 16 = 470 kg. Hence, the water-to-geopolymer solids ratio by mass =
82/470 = 0.17. Extra water of 90 litres is calculated on trial basis to get adequate workability.
Superplasticizer was added to maintain adequate workability.
The geopolymer concrete mixture proportions are given as follows:

Table 3.6 GPC Mix Proportions

Mass (kg/m3)
Materials FA100- FA100- FA100-
SLAG0 SLAG50 SLAG100

20 mm 776 776 776

Coarse aggregate
10 mm 517 517 517

Fine aggregate Sand 554 277 o

Fly ash (Class F) 409 409 409

SLAG o 277 554

Potassium silicate solution 102 102 102

Potassium hydroxide solution 41 (10M) 41 (10M) 41 (10M)

Extra water 90 90 90

Superplasticizer 2.86 2.86 2.86

JNTUCEA Page 23
3.4 Manufacture of Test Specimens
3.4.1 Preparation of Alkaline Liquid
In this study, KOH solids of 10x40=400 grams have been dissolved in 600 ml of water to
prepare one litre of KOH solution with a concentration of 10 M. Where, 40 is the molecular
weight of KOH pellets. The Potassium silicate solution and the Potassium hydroxide solution
were mixed together one day before prior to use.

3.4.2 Manufacture of Fresh concrete

The aggregates were prepared in saturated-surface-dry (SSD) condition. Fly ash, SLAG
and aggregates were mixed for about 3 minutes. 70% of extra water was added to the mix and
mixed for one minute. Then, the alkaline liquid was added with remaining 30% of extra water
and the mix was thoroughly mixed for about 2 minutes. The fresh concrete was cast and
compacted by the usual methods used in the case of Portland cement concrete (Hardjito and
Rangan, 2005). Fresh fly ash and GGBS-based geopolymer concrete was usually cohesive. The
workability of the fresh fly ash and GGBS-based geopolymer concrete was measured by means
of the conventional slump test.

3.4.3 Curing of Test Specimens

After casting and demoulding, the test specimens were kept for curing at ambient room
temperature till the execution of the testing on the specimens.

3.5 Test methods

3.5.1 General
In the course of investigation, Portland cement has been replaced fly ash and SLAG with
different proportions as FA100-SLAG0; FA100-SLAG50& FA100-SLAG100.

The physico chemical properties of fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag, sand
and water used in the investigation were analyzed based on standard experimental procedures
laid down in IS ASTM and BS codes. The tests conducted on Geo polymer concrete are

JNTUCEA Page 24
Compressive strength, Split Tensile strength, Flexural strength and Modulus of Elasticity as per
the respective IS, BS and ASTM codes.

3.5.2 Compressive Strength test

Compression test is one of the most common test conducted on hardened concrete, partly
because it is most important and it is easy to perform further most of the desirable characteristic
properties of concrete are qualitatively related to its strength.
The compression test is carried out on specimens like cubical or cylindrical in shape
sometimes prisms are also used. The end parts of beam are left intact after failure in flexure and
because of the square cross section of the beam this part of the beam could be advantageously
used to find out the compressive strength.

Fig.3.4 Testing of cubes for compressive strength

The compressive strength of concrete is the most important and useful property of
Concrete. The compression test was carried out using 2000 KN compression testing machine.
The compressive strength of the GPC was conducted on the cubical specimens for all the
mixes after 7, 14, 28, 56 and 112 days of curing as per code. 9 No’s of 150 mm cube specimen
were made for each mix and 3 samples in each were cast and tested for 7, 14, 28, 56 and 112
days respectively. The average value of these 3 specimens was taken for study.

JNTUCEA Page 25
 The compressive strength (f’c) of the specimen was calculated by dividing the maximum
load applied to the specimen by the cross-sectional area of the specimen as given below.
f ’c = P/A

Where, f ’c = Compressive strength of the concrete (in N/mm2)

P = Maximum load applied to the specimen (in Newton)
A = Cross-sectional area of the specimen (in mm2)

3.5.3 Split Tensile Strength test

Fig.3.5 Testing of cylinders for Split tensile strength

Splitting Tensile Strength (STS) test was conducted on the specimens for all the mixes
after 28 days of curing as per code. Three cylindrical specimens of size 150 mm x 300 mm were
cast and tested for each age and each mix. The load was applied gradually till the failure of the
specimen occurs. The maximum load applied was then noted. Length and cross-section of the
specimen was measured. The splitting tensile strength (fct) was calculated as follows:

JNTUCEA Page 26
 fct =2P / 𝝅𝒍𝒅

Where, fct = Splitting tensile strength of concrete (in N/mm2)

P = Maximum load applied to the specimen (in Newton)
l = Length of the specimen (in mm)
d = cross-sectional diameter of the specimen (in mm)
The experimental results were compared to the predicted STS values of all mixes as given by
Table 4.4.

3.5.4 Flexure Strength test

Fig.3.6 Testing of prisms for Flexure strength

Flexural strength test was conducted on the specimens for all the mixes at different curing
periods as per code. Three concrete beam specimens of size 100 mm x 100 mm x 50o mm were
cast and tested for each age and each mix. The load was applied gradually till the failure of the
specimen occurs. The maximum load applied was then noted. The distance between the line of
fracture and the near support ‘a’ was measured. The flexural strength (fcr) was calculated as
follows:

JNTUCEA Page 27
When ‘a’ is greater than 13.3 cm for 1o cm specimen, fcr is
fcr = (P x l) / (b x d2)
When ‘a’ is less than 13.3 cm but greater than 11.0 cm for 1o cm specimen, fcris
fcr = (3 x P x a) / (b x d2)
Where, fcr = Flexural strength of concrete (in N/mm2)
P = Maximum load applied to the specimen (in Newton)
b = measured width of the specimen (in mm)
d = measured depth of the specimen at the point of failure (in mm)
l = Length of the specimen on which the specimen was supported (in mm)

JNTUCEA Page 28
 CHAPTER-4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSiONS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the Compressive strength, Split tensile strength and flexural
strength of GPC at ambient room temperature curing. The compressive strength values of GPC
mixes were measured after 7, 14, 28, 56and 112 days of curing. The split tensile strength values
of GPC mixes were measured after 28, 56 and 112 days of curing. The flexural strength values of
GPC mixes were measured at 28, 56 and 112 days of curing.

4.2 Compressive Strength

Table 4.1 shows the compressive strength of GPC mixes with different proportions of fly
ash and GGBS (FA100-SLAG0; FA100-SLAG50 & FA100-SLAG100 ) at different curing
periods.

Table 4.1 Compressive strength of GPC

Mix type
Age
Mechanical property FA100- FA100- FA100-
(days)
SLAG0 SLAG50 SLAG100
7 13.24 30.1 42.0
14 21.42 34.6 48.2
Compressive strength, f’c
28 27.21 41.8 53.4
(MPa)
56 31.6 45.5 57.3
112 34.5 49.8 61.6

It was observed that there was a significant increase in compressive strength with the
increase in percentage of SLAG from o% to 100% in all curing periods as shown in Fig. 4.1. It
can be concluded that the increase in SAND replacement level enhances strength improvement
in geopolymers. The GPC with 100% SLAG sample exhibited compressive strength values of

JNTUCEA Page 29
42 MPa, 48.2 MPa, 53.4 MPa, 57.3 MPa and 61.6 MPa after 7, 14, 28, 56 and 112 days of curing
respectively at ambient room temperature.
70

60
Compressive strength (MPa)

50

40
FA100-SLAG0
30 FA100-SLAG50
FA100-SLAG100
20

10

0
7 14 28 56 112
Age (Days)

Fig. 4.1 Compressive strength versus Age

4.3 Split Tensile Strength

Table 4.2 shows the split tensile strength of GPC mixes with different proportions of

Fly ash and GGBS (FA100-SLAG0; FA100-SLAG50& FA100-SLAG100 ) at different curing

periods.

Table 4.2 Split tensile strength of GPC

Mix type
Age
Mechanical property FA100- FA100- FA100-
(days)
SLAG0 SLAG50 SLAG100
28 1.92 2.62 3.42
Split tensile strength, fct
56 2.24 2.83 3.74
(MPa)
112 2.48 2.92 3.92

JNTUCEA Page 30
 4.5

3.5
Split Tensile strength(MPa)

2.5
FA100-SLAG0
2
FA100-SLAG50
1.5 FA100-SLAG100
1

0.5

0
28 56 112
Age (Days)

Fig. 4.2 Split tensile strength of mixes

It was observed that there was a significant increase in splitting tensile strength with the
increase in percentage of SLAG from o% to 100% in all curing periods as shown in Fig. 4.2. It
can be concluded that the increase in SAND replacement level improves the microstructure of
GPC thus leads to enhancement of splitting tensile strength of GPC. The GPC with 100% SLAG
sample exhibited splitting tensile strength values of 3.42 MPa, 3.74 MPa and 3.92 MPa after 28,
56 and 112 days of curing respectively at ambient room temperature.

4.4 Flexural strength

Table 4.3 shows the flexural strength of GPC mixes with different proportions of fly ash
and GGBS ( FA100-SLAG0; FA100-SLAG50& FA100-SLAG100 ) at different curing periods.

JNTUCEA Page 31
 Table 4.3 Flexural strength of GPC

Mix type
Age
Mechanical property FA100- FA100- FA100-
(days)
SLAG0 SLAG50 SLAG100
28 3.96 5.09 5.39
Flexural strength, fcr
56 4.11 5.32 5.95
(MPa)
112 4.46 5.46 6.28

6
Flexural strength(MPa)

4
FA100-SLAG0
3 FA100-SLAG50
FA100-SLAG100
2

0
28 56 112
Age(Days)

Fig. 4.3 Flexural strength of mixes

It was observed that there was a significant increase in flexural strength with the increase
in percentage of SLAG from o% to 100% in all curing periods as shown in Fig. 4.2. It can be
concluded that the increase in SAND replacement level refines the pore structure of GPC thus
improves the flexural strength of GPC. The GPC with 100% SLAG sample exhibited splitting
tensile strength values of 5.39 MPa, 5.95 MPa and 6.28 MPa after 28, 56 and 112 days of curing
respectively at ambient room temperature.

JNTUCEA Page 32
 From the results it is revealed that the FA based GPC mixes have attained higher values
of strength properties at all curing period, when slag is used as complete replacement(100%)of
sand. For the 50% replacement of slag, the GPC mixes have attained medium properties at all
curing periods.

Hence from the figs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, it is concluded that the increased replacement level of slag
increased the mechanical properties of FA based GPC mixes at ambient room temperature
curing. Keeping in view of sustainability, slag can be used as complete replacement of sand in
FA based GPC mixes Siddique (2007).

JNTUCEA Page 33
 5.0 CONCLUSIONS

This chapter summarizes the overall conclusions drawn from the investigation of FA based
GPC mixes using slag as sand replacement. The GPC mixture proporti ons used in this study were
developed based on the previous study on GPC (Hardjito and Rangan, 2005). In this study, short-term
mechanical properties of FA based GPC mixes were studied at different replacement level of slag and
curing period.

5.1. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the test results, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. The increased level of slag replacement increased the mechanical properties of FA based
GPC mixes at ambient room temperature curing itself without the need of heat curing as
in the case of only FA based GPC mixes.
2. For 50% and 100% slag replacement, FA and GPC mixes attained enhanced mechanical
properties at ambient room temperature curing at all ages.
3. Keeping in view of savings in natural resources, sustainability, environment, production
cost, maintenance cost and all other GPC properties, it can be recommended slag as an
alternative to sand for the use of constructions.

5.2. Future work

Based on the investigation of this project, the future work includes:

● Study on the effect of molarity of KOH on mechanical properties of FA and GGBS based GPC
mixes.
● Study on durability properties of FA and GGBS based GPC mixes.
● Keeping in view of the availability of natural resources and environmental aspects, it is
recommended to replace some percentage of sand with quarry dust in FA and GGBS based GPC
mixes and study all GPC hardened and durability properties.

JNTUCEA Page 34
 REFERENCES

[1]. Rangan, B.V. (2008), Fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Curtin University of Technology.

[2]. Lloyd, N. and Rangan, B.(2010), Geopolymer Concrete with Fly Ash, in Zachar, J. and Claisse, P.
and Naik, T. and Ganjian, G. (ed), Second International Conference on Sustainable Construction
Materials and Technologies volume 3, pp. 1493-1504. Ancona, Italy: UWM Center for By-Products
Utilization.

[3]. Sumajouw, M.D.J. and Rangan, B.V. (2006), Low-Calcium fly ash-based

geopolymer concrete: Reinforced beams and columns, Curtin University of Technology.

[4]. Hardjito, D. (2005), Studies of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Ph. D. Curtin University of
Technology, Dept. of Civil Engineering.

[5]. Hardjito, D. and Rangan, B. V. (2005), Development and Properties of Low-Calcium Fly Ash-based
Geopolymer Concrete, Research Report GC1, Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of
Technology, Perth, available at espace@curtin or www.geopolymer.org.

[6]. Davidovits, J. (1987), Ancient and modern concretes: what is the real difference?, Concrete
international, 23-28.

[7]. Davidovits, J. (1994b), Properties of Geopolymer Cements, First international conference on alkaline
cements and concretes, 131-149.

[8]. Davidovits, J. (1988b), Geopolymer Chemistry and Properties, Paper presented at the Geopolymer
’88, First European Conference on Soft Mineralogy, Compiegne, France.

[9]. Davidovits, J. (2005), Green-Chemistry and sustainable development granted and false ideas about
Geopolymer concrete, International workshop on geopolymers and geopolymer concrete, Perth,
Austraailia.

[10]. Rangan, B.V., Hardjito, D., Wallah, S. E., and Sumaj ouw, D.M.J. (2005a), Fly Ash-Based
Geopolymer Concrete: a construction material for sustainable development, Concrete in Australia,
31, 25-30.

JNTUCEA Page 35
[11]. Xu, H., & Van Deventer, J.S.J. (2000), The geopolymerisation of aluminosilicate minerals,
International Journal of Mineral Processing, 59(3), 247- 266.

[12]. Davidovits, J. (1999, 30 June - 2 July 1999), Chemistry of Geopolymeric Systems, Terminology,
Paper presented at the Geopolymere ’99 International Conference, Saint-Quentin, France.

[13]. Vijaya Rangan (2008), Studies on fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Malaysian Construction
Research Journal 3 (2): 1-2o

[14]. Palomo et al. (1990), Study of fly ash based geopolymer concrete, Research Report GC1, Faculty of
Engineering, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, available at espace@curtin or
www.geopolymer.org.

[15]. Cheng, T. W. and J. P. Chiu (2003), Fire-resistant Geopolymer Produced by Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag, Minerals Engineering 16(3): 2o5-210.

[16]. Gourley, J. T. (2003), Geopolymers; opportunities for Environmentally Friendly Construction

Materials, Paper presented at the Materials 2003 Conference: Adaptive Materials for a Modern
Society, Sydney.

[17]. Swanepoel, J. C. and C. A. Strydom (2002). Utilisation of fly ash in a geopolymeric material,
Applied Geochemistry 17(8): 1143-1148.

[18]. Chindaprasirt, P et al. (2007), Workability and strength of coarse high calcium fly ash geopolymer,
Cement and Concrete composites, Vol.29, 224-229

[19]. Supraja, V. and Kanta Rao M. (2011), Experimental study on Geo-Polymer concrete incorporating
GGBS, International Journal of Electronics, Communication & Soft Computing Science and
Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 2.

[2o]. Ganapati Naidu et al. (2012), A Study on Strength Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with
Addition of GGBS, International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, 2(4), 19-28.

[21]. Aminul Islam Laskar and Rajan Bhattacharjee (2012), Effect of Plasticizer and Superplasticizer on
Workability of Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Concrete, (AARCV 2012), Paper ID SAM134, Vol. 2

JNTUCEA Page 36
[22]. Parthiban et al. (2013), Effect of Potassium Hydroxide Concentration and Alkaline Ratio on the
Compressive Strength of Slag Based Geopolymer Concrete, International Journal of ChemTech
Research, Vol.6, N0.4, 2446-2450.

[23]. Zhang Yunsheng and Sun wel, (2006), Fly ash based Geoploymer Concrete. The Indian Concrete
Journal, January 2006, 2o-24.

[24]. Bakharev, T. (2006), Thermal behavior of geopolymer prepared using Class F fly ash and elevated
temperature curing, Cement and Concrete research, Vol.36, 1134-1147.

[25]. Sekhar et al. (2014), Strength Studies on Fly Ash and GGBS Blended Geopolymer Concrete,
B.Tech thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, A.I.T.S, Tirupati.

[26]. Khadar et al. (2014), Strength properties of class F fly ash (FA) based geopolymer concrete (GPC)
using slag as sand replacement, B.Tech thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, A.I.T.S, Tirupati.

[27]. Pavan (2012), Effect of fly ash (class F) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) on the
mechanical properties of geopolymer concrete, M.Tech thesis, Department of Civil Engineering,
S.V.U, Tirupati.

[28]. Priyanka et al. (2014), Effect of molarity on strength properties of fly ash based geopolymer
concrete, B.Tech thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, A.I.T.S, Tirupati.

[29]. Sudarsan, k. (2013), Performance of 14 molarity based geopolymer mortar with fly ash and GGBS,
M.Tech thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, S.V.U, Tirupati.

[30]. Wallah, S. E., & Rangan, B.V. (2006), Low-Calcium Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete: Long-
Term Properties, (Research Report GC 2), Perth, Faculty of Engineering Curtin University of
Technology.

[31]. Sofi M, van Deventer J S J, Mendis P A and Lukey G C (2007a), Engineering Properties of
Inorganic Polymer Concretes (IPCs), Cement and Concrete Research, 37(2), 251-257.

[32]. Sanjay Kumar et al. (2005), High strength Geoploymeric materials through mechanical activation of
fly ash, Research, Voi.37, 251-257.

JNTUCEA Page 37
[33]. Venkatesh babu and Divya mohan (2005), Study on strength properties of fly ash based geopolymer
concrete-concrete without cement, Research report fly ash, India.

[34]. Nunes et al. (2007), Microstructure and properties of geopolymer concrete containing recycled glass
as aggregate, Materials (1996-1944);oct2013, Vol. 6 Issue 1o, p4450

[35]. Kedarswamy (2007), Performance of geopolymer concrete at elevated temperature, M.Tech thesis,
Department of Civil Engineering, B.M.S.C.E., Banglalore.

[36]. Satia et al. (2008), Study the fly ash based geopolymer with alkali activators, IIT Madras.

[37]. Rajamane N.P, Nataraja M.C, Lakshmanan N , and Ambily P.S (2011), Literature Survey on
Geopolymer Concretes and a Research Plan in Indian Context, www.masterbuilder.c0.in Publishers
Note: Part - 2 to be features in May 2012 edition

[38]. CCHRC.2010: Investigating 21st Century Cement Production in Interior Alaska Using Alaskan
Resources, Cold Climate Housing Research Center. Available at http://www.cchrc.org/Reports

[39]. ASTM C128-15, Standard Test Method for Relative Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of
Fine Aggregate, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org

[40]. ASTM C29 / C29M-o9, Standard Test Method for Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in
Aggregate, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2009, www.astm.org

[41]. ASTM C136 / C136M-14, Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse
Aggregates, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, www.astm.org

[42]. IS 2386 Part-I 1963 Indian standard methods of test for aggregates for concrete: Part-III specific
gravity, density, voids, absorption and bulking, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

[43]. IS 383 (1970). Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources for concrete.
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

[44]. IS 456 (2000). Plain and reinforced concrete code for practice. Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.

[45]. IS 516 (1991). Methods of tests for strength of concrete [CED 2: Cement and Concrete]. Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.

JNTUCEA Page 38
[46]. ASTM C 365 & C39 / C39M-15a, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org

[47]. BS EN 13892-2:2002 Methods of test for screed materials. Determination of flexural and
compressive strength

[48]. IS 5816 (1999). Method of Test Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete [CED 2: Cement and
Concrete]. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

[49]. ASTM C496 / C496M-11, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2004, www.astm.org

[50]. ASTM C78 / C78M-15, Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple
Beam with Third-Point Loading), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015,
www.astm.org

[51]. ASTM C469 / C469M-14, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s
Ratio of Concrete in Compression, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
2014, www.astm.org

[52]. ASTM C618-o3, Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan
for Use in Concrete, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003, www.astm.org

[53]. IS 3812 (1981). Specifications for fly ash for use as pozzolana and admixture. Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.

[54]. IS 12o89 (1987). Specifications for granulated slag for manufacture of Portland slag cement. Bureau
of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

[55]. ACI 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete. American Concrete Institute, Detroit;
1995.

[56]. ACI 363R. State-of-the-art report on high-strength concrete. American Concrete Institute, Detroit.
1992.

[57]. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. American Association of Highway and
Transportation officials, Washington, D.C. 2006.

JNTUCEA Page 39
[58]. AS3600-2005, Standards Australia.

[59]. CEB-FIP MC 90. 1993. COMITÉ EURo-INTERNATIoNAL DU BÉTON: CEB-FIP Model Code
1990, Bulletin D’Information, N0. 213/214. Lausanne: Thomas Telford Services Ltd.

JNTUCEA Page 40