Durability against Wetting–Drying Cycles of

Water Treatment Sludge–Fly Ash Geopolymer and Water

Treatment Sludge–Cement and Silty Clay–Cement Systems
Suksun Horpibulsuk, Ph.D., P.E. 1; Cherdsak Suksiripattanapong, Ph.D. 2; Wisanukhorn Samingthong 3;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Runglawan Rachan, Ph.D. 4; and Arul Arulrajah, Ph.D. 5

Abstract: The viability of using two waste materials, water treatment sludge (WTS) and fly ash (FA), for developing sustainable masonry
units has been previously investigated in terms of strength but the important aspect of durability against wetting–drying (w–d) cycles has yet
to be studied. A study on durability against w–d cycles, an important parameter for service life design of the sustainable masonry units, is
investigated in this paper. The liquid alkaline activator (L) was a mixture of sodium silicate (Na2 SiO3 ) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH), and a
high calcium fly ash (FA) was used as a precursor. The results of cyclic w–d test indicate that the WTS–FA geopolymer manufactured with an
optimum ingredient (L∶FA ¼ 1.6, Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ¼ 90∶10) and at an optimum heat condition of 85°C for 72 h can be used as durable
bearing masonry units; i.e., the compressive strength is greater than 12 MPa after 12 w–d cycles. For this optimum ingredient, the w–d
cycle strength, quðw−dÞ at heat temperatures between 65 and 95°C and durations between 24 and 120 h was found to be mainly dependent
upon the initial soaked (without w–d cycle) strength qu0 , and the normalized strength quðw−dÞ =qu0 versus number of w–d cycles relationship
expresses as a logarithm function. This relationship facilitates a mix design to attain the required strength at a target service life, which is
very useful for civil engineering practitioners and researchers alike. It is evident from this research that portland cement is not a suitable
cementing agent to manufacture WTS masonry units because alum in WTS retards the cement hydration, unlike a geopolymer binder, which
was proven to be suitable. Compared with a traditional clay–cement sample at the same initial soaked strength, the WTS–FA geopolymer
sample exhibits higher durability. This indicates that the WTS–FA geopolymer masonry units have a longer service life than clay–cement
masonry units, which is typically used in many countries. This research enables WTS traditionally destined for landfill to be used in a
sustainable manner as an aggregate in geopolymer masonry units, which is significant from engineering, economical, and environmental
perspectives. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001351. © 2015 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Sludge; Fly ash; Geopolymer; Durability; Wet–dry cycles; Masonry units.

Introduction drained to sludge lagoons for disposal. The increasing demand of

Water production requires the extraction of water from natural
sources. The water treatment process results in a muddy sludge by-
product. The clarifier system employed in water treatment plants
results in the sludge flocculating and depositing as a residue to
the bottom of the treatment tank. The liquid sludge is subsequently
1 growing population, the quantity of WTS is subsequently increas-
Professor and Chair, School of Civil Engineering, and Head of Center
of Excellence in Civil Engineering, Suranaree Univ. of Technology, 111
University Ave., Muang District, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
(corresponding author). E-mail: suksun@g.sut.ac.th; suksun@sut.ac.th
2
Lecturer, School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and
Architecture, Rajamangala Univ. of Technology Suvarnabhumi, Suphan
Buri Campus, 450 Moo 6 Suphan Buri-Chainat Rd., Sam Chuk District,
Suphan Buri 72130, Thailand. E-mail: cherdsak_2526@hotmail.com
3
Post-Graduate Researcher, School of Civil Engineering, Suranaree
Univ. of Technology, 111 University Ave., Muang District, Nakhon Ratch-
asima 30000, Thailand. E-mail: khorn_civil_11@hotmail.com
4
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Mahanakorn Univ. of
Technology, Nong Chok District, Bangkok 10530, Thailand. E-mail:
runglawa@gmail.com
5
Professor, Swinburne Univ. of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122,
Australia. E-mail: aarulrajah@swin.edu.au
Note. This manuscript was submitted on January 5, 2015; approved on
April 7, 2015; published online on May 26, 2015. Discussion period open
until October 26, 2015; separate discussions must be submitted for indivi-
dual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Materials in Civil Engi-
neering, © ASCE, ISSN 0899-1561/04015078(9)/$25.00.
treated water produced by the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority
of Thailand (MWA) and in similar water treatment plants world-
wide, has resulted in increasing quantities of sludge by-products
generated annually. For MWA, the water treatment sludge (WTS)
is generated with the maximum capacity of 300 × 103 m3 per day
in the dry season and about 700×103 m3 per day in the wet season.
With continuous increases in water demand due to a rapidly
ing at an ever-increasing rate and has been mainly disposed to
landfills.
There has been a recent initiative by MWA to research the usage
of WTS as construction and building materials according to the
zero-waste directive. The usage of WTS products results in signifi-
cantly less energy production. The usage of recycled waste materi-
als (Huang et al. 2002; Taha et al. 2002; Wartman et al. 2004;
Grubb et al. 2006; Zekkos et al. 2006; Akbulut and Gurer 2007;
Landris 2007; Reddy et al. 2009; Puppala et al. 2011; Disfani et al.
2012; Horpibulsuk et al. 2012, 2014; Kampala and Horpibulsuk
2013; Arulrajah et al. 2011, 2014a, 2013, 2014b, c; Kampala et al.
2014; Phetchuay et al. 2014) has been applied in recent years in a
wide range of applications such as embankment fills, pipe-
bedding, pavement bases/subbases, and building masonry units.
WTS has been successfully used as aggregate to manufacture sus-
tainable geopolymer bearing masonry units (Suksiripattanapong
et al. 2015). The liquid alkaline activator (L) was a mixture of
Na2 SiO3 and NaOH, and the precursor was a high calcium fly

© ASCE 04015078-1 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078

 ash. The strength requirement is 2.5 MPa for nonbearing and
7.0 MPa for bearing masonry units, according to the Thailand In-
dustrial Standard (TIS) (TIS 1987). Similar strength requirements
are also specified in many countries (Du et al. 1999, 2012, 2013).
Geopolymers are touted for their high performance (high
strength and durability), low CO2 emissions, and low energy con-
sumption. They has become increasingly popular in recent years as
an environmental friendly alternative to ordinary portland cement
(Davidovits 1991). Silica-rich and alumina-rich materials such as
clay or kaolin (Buchwald and Kaps 2002), fly ash, and bottom ash
(Davidovits et al. 1999) can be used as a precursor to react with the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

liquid alkaline activator. Fly ash (FA) derived from coal-fired elec-
tricity generation provides the greatest opportunity for commercial
utilization of this technology due to the plentiful worldwide raw
material supply (Van Jaarsveld et al. 1998; Mohapatra and Rao
2001). FA is extensively used as a precursor for geopolymers in
Australia (Rickard et al. 2011; Rickard et al. 2012) and Thailand Fig.1. Grain size distribution of WTS, silty clay, and FA
(Chindaprasirt et al. 2007; Sata et al. 2012).
Sukmak et al. (2013a, b, 2014) previously investigated the
strength and durability of a clay–FA geopolymer as bearing ma-
Table 1. Chemical Composition of WTS, Fly Ash, and Silty Clay
sonry units. The 7-day strength of the clay–FA geopolymer is
greater than 10 MPa, suitable as bearing masonry unit. The durabil- Chemical
ity against sulfate attack of clay–FA geoplymer is better than that composition (%) WTS Fly ash Silty clay
of clay–cement; i.e., there is no major change in the microstructure SiO2 67.33 47.51 26.15
and pH of the clay–FA geopolymer when exposed to sulfate Al2 O3 22.47 13.14 20.10
solutions. Fe2 O3 6.15 6.66 7.55
Even though Suksiripattanapong et al. (2015) have shown that CaO 0.68 30.24 32.89
the strength of WTS–FA geopolymer meets the requirement speci- MgO N.D. N.D. 0.47
fied by TIS, the durability of this material has not been examined. SO3 1.04 N.D. 4.92
This material generally encounters the change of weather during Na2 O N.D. 0.41 N.D.
K2O 1.26 1.63 3.17
wet (rainy) and dry (summer) seasons, which is particular relevant
LOI 0.78 0.42 3.44
for tropical countries such as Thailand, as well as parts of Australia.
The wetting and drying (w–d) cycles result in tension and surface Note: N.D. = Not detected.
cracks, which reduce the strength of material. The investigation of
the service life of the WTS–FA geopolymer via a w–d cycle test is
significant and is the focus of this research. SiO2 and Al2 O3 in crystal form. The specific gravity is 2.61
FA is used as a precursor and a mixture of NaOH and Na2 SiO3 is and the liquid limit is 69%. The WTS is classified as a nonplastic
used as a liquid alkaline activation in this research. The geopoly- material because the plastic limit could not be measured using
merization reaction is accelerated by appropriate heat temperature ASTM D 4318 (ASTM 2005). The compaction characteristics
and duration. The durability of the WTS–FA geopolymer is com- under modified Proctor energy [ASTM D 1557 (ASTM 2012b)]
pared with that of WTS–cement and silty clay–cement. The silty are optimum water content (OWC) of 34.3%, and maximum dry
clay is abundant and commonly used as aggregate to produce non- unit weight (γ dmax ) of 12.37 kN=m3 .
bearing masonry units in Thailand. Results of durability test on the
three materials (WTS–FA geopolymer, WTS–cement, and silty Silty Clay
clay–cement) will be compared to examine the role of aggregates Silty clay was collected from the Suranaree University of Technol-
and binders (cement and geopolymer) on the manufacture of ma- ogy campus in Nakhon Ratchasima province of Thailand at a depth
sonry units. This research will enable WTS traditionally destined of 3 m. Fig. 1 shows the grain size distribution of the silty clay,
for landfill to be used in a sustainable manner as an aggregate in indicating 2% sand, 43% silt, and 55% clay. D50 is 0.0009 mm
geopolymer masonry units, which is significant from engineering, and its specific gravity is 2.76. The liquid and plastic limits are
economical, and environmental perspectives. approximately 61 and 22%, respectively. Based on the unified soil
classification system (USCS), the clay is classified as highly plastic
(CH). The soil swelling potential was investigated by the free swell-
Materials and Methods ing test proposed by Prakash and Sridharan (2004), which predicts
the dominant clay mineralogy of soils satisfactorily (Horpibulsuk
et al. 2007). The free swell ratio, FSR, is defined as the ratio of
Materials
equilibrium sediment volume of 10 g of oven-dried soil passing
through a 425-μm sieve in distilled water (V d ) to that in carbon
Water Treatment Sludge (WTS) tetra chloride or kerosene (V k ). The clay is classified as low swell-
WTS was collected from the Bang Khen water treatment plant of ing with a free swell ratio (FSR) of 1.4. The chemical composition
the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority of Thailand. The WTS at using X-ray fluorescence (XRF) of the silty clay is shown in
this plant consists of 0.12% sand, 99.72% silt, and 0.16%. The Table 1.
average grain size, D50 , is 0.015 mm (15 microns). The grain size
distribution and mineral and chemical compositions were obtained Fly Ash (FA)
from laser particle and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis as shown FA was obtained from the Mae Moh power plant of the electricity
in Fig. 1 and Table 1, respectively. WTS is composed mainly of generating authority of Thailand (EGAT) in the northern region of

© ASCE 04015078-2 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of (a) sludge; (b) silty clay; (c) fly ash
Thailand. The specific gravity of FA is 2.35. Table 1 summarizes
the chemical composition of FA using X-ray fluorescence (XRF).
Total amount of the major components (SiO2 , Al2 O3 and Fe2 O3 )
are 67.58% while the CaO content is 30.24%; therefore, it is clas-
sified as Class C according to ASTM C 618 (ASTM 2012a). Fig. 1
shows the grain size distribution curve of FA, which was tested by a
laser particle size analysis. The average grain size of FA is 13.25
microns, which is similar to that of WTS. It is shown that both the
FA and WTS particles are larger than the silty clay ones. The mor-
phology of the WTS and the FA is shown in Fig. 2. The FA particles
are fine and spherical whereas the WTS and silty clay particles are
irregular in shape.
Liquid Alkaline Activator (L)
The liquid alkaline activator (L) is a mixture of Na2 SiO3 , which
consists of 9% Na2 O and 30% SiO2 by weight, and NaOH with
a concentration of 10 molars. Both Na2 SiO3 and NaOH are chemi-
cal analytical reagents.
Sample Preparation
WTS–FA Geopolymer
The WTS-FA geopolymer sample is a combination of WTS, FA,
and liquid alkaline activator (Na2 SiO3 and NaOH). The WTS:FA
ratio was fixed at 70∶30 and the Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios were
100∶0, 90∶10, 80∶20, 70∶30, and 50∶50 as previously suggested by
Suksiripattanapong et al. (2015). The Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios less
than 50:50 were not investigated in this paper as maximum strength
© ASCE 04015078-3
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078
of WTS–FA geopolymer was found at Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios
between 100:0 and 50:50 (Suksiripattanapong et al. 2015). The
air-dried WTS and FA were mixed for 5 min in a mixer to ensure
uniformity of the mixture. The mixer was stopped and the mixture
was activated by the liquid alkaline activator (L) and mixed for an
additional 5 min. The mixture was then compacted under the modi-
fied Proctor energy. Once the compaction curves were obtained,
the WTS–FA–L mixture at various L–FA contents was statically
compressed in a cylindrical mold with a 50-mm diameter and a
height of 100 mm. The compression was performed by a manual
hydraulic jack. The samples were dismantled, wrapped within vinyl
sheet, and then cured at ambient room temperature, 65, 75, 85, and
95°C respectively for durations of 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 h. After
heating (at 65, 75, 85, and 95°C), the samples were subsequently
cured at room temperature (27–30°C) until the various preplanned
curing times lapsed. Compressive strengths of WTS-FA geopoly-
mer samples were measured after 7 and 28 days of curing in accor-
dance with ASTM D 1633 (ASTM 2000). The durability of WTS–
FA geopolymer was measured after 28 days of curing in accordance
with ASTM C599-03 (ASTM 2003).
WTS–Cement and Silty Clay–Cement
The WTS:cement ratios and the silty clay:cement ratios tested were
91:9, 80:20, and 70:30. After obtaining the Proctor compaction
curves, the WTS–cement, and silty clay–cement mixtures at their
corresponding OWC were statically compressed in a cylindrical
mold with a 50-mm diameter and a height of 100 mm. The samples
were subsequently cured at a room temperature (27–30°C) only
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
 without heat curing because the clay–cement masonry units in
Thailand are generally cured at room temperature. Compressive
strength and durability of WTS–cement and silty clay–cement
samples were measured after 28 days of curing.
Durability Test
The method of cyclic w–d test as per ASTM C599-03 (ASTM
2003) was adopted for sample preparations. The samples were sub-
merged in deionized water at room temperature for 5 h. They were
then dried in an oven at a temperature of 70°C for 48 h and air-dried
at room temperature for at least 3 h. This process is referred to as 1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
w–d cycle. After attaining the target w–d cycles, the samples were
immersed in deionized water for 2 h at the constant temperature of
25–2°C. Unconfined compression (UC) tests were then undertaken
with a rate of vertical displacement of 1 mm=min. The 1, 3, 6, 9,
and 12 w–d cycles were considered in this study.
Test Results
Compressive Strength and Water Absorption
of WTS-FA Geopolymer
Fig. 3 shows the relationships between total unit weight and L∶FA
at various Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios. The compaction curve of
WTS–FA–L mixture is typical to that of compacted soils in
that the unit weight increases with increasing L∶FA until the maxi-
mum unit weight is attained at an optimum L∶FA value. Beyond
this optimum value, the unit weight decreases as L∶FA increases.
The optimum L:FA exhibiting the maximum unit weight is the
same for all Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios and is approximately equal
to 1.6. The maximum unit weight increases with increasing
Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH and then decreases after a certain Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH.
The Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH of 90∶10 exhibits the highest maximum unit
weight.
Fig. 4 shows the relationships between dry unit weight and
water content of WTS–cement and silty clay–cement at various
cement replacement ratios. For a particular material, the γ d;max
and OWC relationship is essentially the same for various cement
replacement ratios. In other words, input of cement does not affect
the compaction curve, which is in agreement with the study
reported previously by Horpibulsuk et al. (2008, 2009) for fine-
grained and coarse-grained soils. The γ d;max values are 12.4 and
17.5 kN=m3 and the OWC values are 36.5 and 18.5% for WTS–
cement and silty clay–cement, respectively.
Fig. 3. Compaction curves of WTS–FA–L mixture
© ASCE
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078
Fig. 4. Compaction curves of WTS–cement and silty clay–cement
mixtures
Fig. 5 shows the effect of heat condition on the 7-day strength
of the WTS–FA geopolymer samples for various heat tempera-
tures, heat durations and Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios at the optimum
L∶FA ratio of 1.6. The unconfined compressive strength (qu0 )
of WTS–FA geopolymer, cured at room temperature is presented
by solid lines for comparison purposes. The qu0 of WTS–FA geo-
polymer samples cured at different temperatures increases as
heat duration increases until a threshold heat duration of 72 h,
after which the qu0 remains almost constant. The qu0 of WTS–FA
geopolymer increases with increasing temperature when the tem-
perature is lower than 85°C and then decreases with increasing
temperature. Consequently, the optimum temperature for sample
preparation is 85°C. A higher temperature (95°C) may cause
the immediate decrease of liquid in the sample and induce shrink-
age cracks on the sample (Wongpa et al. 2010; Sukmak et al.
2013b, b).
The qu0 of the WTS–FA geopolymer was compared with TIS
for bearing masonry units and nonbearing masonry units (dashed
lines) as shown in Fig. 5. The results indicate that the WTS–FA
geopolymer for all Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios and heat temperatures
are suitable as nonbearing masonry units except the samples with
a Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 50∶50 and cured at room temperature.
The sample at a Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 50∶50 at curing temper-
ature greater than 65°C is found to be suitable as a nonbearing
masonry unit but not as a bearing masonry unit. The samples
at Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratios of 70∶30 and 80∶20 cured at temperature
of 85°C for 72 h are found to be suitable bearing masonry units.
The Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio providing the highest qu0 at lowest heat
temperature (lowest energy emission) is found at 90:10 and then
regarded as the optimum ratio in this study.
Fig. 6 shows the relationships between water absorption
and soaking time of WTS–FA–geopolymer with the optimum
Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 90∶10 and L:FA ratio of 1.6 after 28 days
of curing at various heat temperatures and heat durations. TIS 57-
2530 (TIS 1987) specified that the allowable water absorption is
14.3% for the density of masonry units less than 16.5 kN=m3 . Fig. 6
shows that the water absorption increases with increasing soaking
time. For all heat temperatures and durations, the water absorption
of WTS-FA geopolymer is lower than the allowable value except
for samples heated at 95°C for duration longer than 72 h. The high
curing temperature and longer heat duration cause the microcracks
on the samples due to loss of moisture and hence an increase in
the absorption capacity.
04015078-4 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 5. Effect of heat condition on 7-day strength of the WTS–FA
geopolymer samples at L:FA ratio of 1.6
Durability of WTS–FA Geopolymer
Figs 7 and 8 show the relationships between wetting–drying
(w–d) cycle strength, quðw−dÞ and weight loss versus number of
w–d cycles, c of the WTS–FA geopolymer at the optimum
Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH of 90:10 and L∶FA of 1.6, and at various curing
temperatures of 65, 75, 85, and 95°C for 24, 48, 72, and 120 h,
respectively. Fig. 7 indicates that for all heat temperatures and
durations, the quðw−dÞ value decreases as c increases until c ¼ 6.
Beyond this c value, the strength reduction is insignificant. The
sample cured at 85°C for a duration longer than 72 h provides the
highest strength for all c values, and is thus regarded as the best
heating condition.
Similarly, Fig. 8 shows that the weight loss increases rapidly
with an increase in c within the first six w–d cycles. Beyond
the 6th w–d cycle, the weight loss is almost constant for all temper-
atures and durations, which is in agreement with the decrease in
© ASCE 04015078-5
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078
Fig. 6. Relationship between water absorption and soaking time of the
WTS–FA geopolymer samples at a Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 90∶10 and
L∶FA ratio of 1.6 for various heat temperatures
compressive strength of WTS–FA geopolymer. The samples heated
at 85°C have the lowest weight loss (about 2.5%), which is asso-
ciated with maximum compressive strength when compared to
other heat temperatures.
The quðw−dÞ values at 12 w–d cycles of all the samples
are greater than 2.5 MPa, which is superior than the TIS strength
requirement for nonbearing units as shown in Fig. 7. As such,
this material can be considered as sustainable durable nonbearing
masonry units. The WTS-FA geopolymer under the optimum
heating condition (cured at 85°C for longer than 72 h) is consid-
ered as durable bearing masonry units (quðw−dÞ at 12 w–d
cycles > 7 MPa). It is evident from the durability test results
(Fig. 7) that the quðw−dÞ values at different values of c are dependent
upon initial soaked (without w–d cycle) strength (qu0 ) value. As
such, the normalized strength quðw−dÞ =qu0 is used as a variable
in analyzing the relationships between quðw−dÞ versus c as previ-
ously done by Kampala et al. (2014) for calcium carbide residue
(CCR) stabilized clay and by Neramitkornburi et al. (2015) for
lightweight cellular cemented clay. The quðw−dÞ =qu0 versus c is
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Relationship between weight loss and number of w–d cycles of

the WTS–FA geopolymer samples at a Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 90:10
and L:FA ratio of 1.6 for various heat temperatures and durations
Fig. 7. Relationship between strength and number of w–d cycles of the
WTS–FA geopolymer samples at a Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ratio of 90∶10 and
L∶FA ratio of 1.6 for various heat temperatures and durations

plotted and presented in Fig. 9. The relationship between

quðw−dÞ =qu0 versus c is unique for different heating conditions
and is represented by a logarithmic function in the form
quðw−dÞ
¼ 0.834 þ 0.072 ln c ð1Þ
qu0

where the coefficient of correlation is 0.91. Using Eq. (1), the w–d
cycle strengths of samples at various heating conditions for a target
number of w–d cycles can be approximated once the corresponding
qu0 is known. The qu0 is simply determined directly from a labo-
ratory UC test. Eq. (1) is thus useful for civil engineering practi-
tioners and researchers since the durability test is time-consuming.

Comparison of Durability among WTS–FA

Geopolymer, WTS–Cement, and Silty Clay–Cement
Fig. 10 shows the comparison of the durability of WTS–FA geo-
polymer, WTS–cement, and silty clay–cement. The cement
replacement ratios for both WTS and silty clay are 9, 20, and
Fig. 9. Relationship between quðw−dÞ =qu0 and number of w–d cycles
30. The test result shows that 28-day strength of WTS–cement

© ASCE 04015078-6 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 10. Comparison of durability of WTS–FA geopolymer, WTS–

cement, and silty clay–cement

is essentially the same for different cement replacement ratios;

i.e., 1.49, 1.51, and 1.58 MPa for cement replacement ratios of
9, 20, and 30%, respectively. This implies that portland cement
is not suitable for improving the WTS, which can be attributed
to the alum in the WTS retarding the cement hydration. However,
the effectiveness of cement on improving silty clay is clearly ob-
served (Fig. 10); i.e., the cement replacement ratios of 9, 20 and
30% give qu0 of 1.61, 3.79, and 5.82 MPa, respectively. The
qu0 of cement stabilized silty clay at 30% replacement is close
to that of WTS–FA geopolymer at Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ¼ 90∶10 cured
at room temperature and is about 5.6–5.8 MPa (nonbearing
masonry units).
The test result shows that the strengths of WTS–FA geopolymer,
WTS–cement, and silty clay–cement decrease as the number of
w–d cycles increases. The strength of WTS–cement samples de-
creases rapidly after one w–d cycle, and the samples fail at c ¼
4 and 7 for cement replacement ratios of 9 and 20%, respectively.
This implies that even though the initial strength qu0 is the same,
the sample with the higher cement replacement ratio exhibits higher
durability. Similarly, the strength of silty clay–cement decreases as
the number of w–d cycles increases. The silty clay–cement samples
at 9 and 20% replacement can be durable until four and seven w–d
cycles, respectively.
The high durability characteristics of geopolymer binder are
illustrated by comparing the strength reduction with number of
w–d cycles between silty clay–cement (30% cement replacement)
and WTS–FA geopolymer (at Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ¼ 90∶10 cured at
room temperature) at the same qu0 (about 5.6–5.8 MPa). It is
evident that the strength of silty clay–cement decreases sharply
at essentially a constant rate (constant slope between strength
and c relationship) while the strength of WTS–FA geopolymer
is almost constant when c > 3. The strength of silty clay–cement
is lower than the TIS strength requirement for nonbearing units
(2.5 MPa) after the 9th w–d cycle. This implies that even with
the same initial compressive strength, the portland cement masonry
units are less durable against w–d cycles than the geopolymer
masonry units.
Fig. 11 shows photos of WTS–FA geopolymer, WTS–cement,
and silty clay–cement samples at c ¼ 12, 7, and 7 cycles, respec-
tively to illustrate the durability characteristics of each material.
Fig. 11. Photos of (a) WTS–FA geopolymer at Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ¼
90∶10, L∶FA ¼ 1.6, 85°C, 72 h, and c ¼ 12 cycles; (b) WTS–cement
at WTS:cement ratio = 80∶20 and c ¼ 7 cycles; (c) silty clay–cement
silty clay:cement ratio = 80∶20 and c ¼ 7 cycles
It is evident that the surface of WTS–FA geopolymer is still smooth
with minimum cracks even at the 12th w–d cycle while the failure
of the WTS–cement and silty clay–cement is clearly observed at a
much lower c. It is concluded from the test results and the photos
that the WTS–FA geopolymer has higher durability against w–d
cycles than the silty clay–cement and the WTS–cement.
Conclusions
This research investigated the durability of a sustainable goepol-
ymer construction material manufactured from traditional waste
materials (WTS and FA). Results of this study suggest that the initial
soaked strength is critical for analysis of w-d cycle strengths of
WTS–FA geopolymer. The geopolymer binder was found to be more
advantageous than cement to stabilize WTS in term of strength
and durability as well as from an environmental perspective. The
following conclusions can be drawn from this research study:
• Even though the strength of the WTS–FA geopolymer meets the
TIS strength requirement as nonbearing units for all tested heat
conditions, some samples fail in the water absorption require-
ment (less than 14.3%). The overheating (95°C for longer
than 72 h) causes the microcracks due to loss of moisture. This
results in the water absorption higher than TIS requirements.

© ASCE 04015078-7 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078

 • The weight loss of WTS–FA geopolymer increases rapidly as
the number of w–d cycles, c increases when c < 6. When
c > 6, the weight loss is slightly constant, which is in agreement
with the relationship between strength and c. The w–d cycle
strength and number of w–d cycles relationship is represented
by a logarithmic function. The proposed relationship facilitates
mix design to attain the required strength at a target service
life, which is very useful for civil engineering practitioners
and researchers alike, particularly as the durability test is time-
consuming.
• In addition to the environmental impact, the geopolymer is a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
more suitable binder to stabilize WTS than portland cement.
Alum in WTS retards the cement hydration and hence the
strength of WTS–cement is essentially the same even with
the increase in input of cement. When compared with two non-
bearing stabilized materials (silty clay–cement and WTS–FA
geopolymer) at the same initial strength (before cyclic w-d test),
the durability of the WTS-FA geopolymer is better than that of
the silty clay–cement. The strength of the silty clay–cement
sharply decreases with c and becomes lower than the TIS
strength requirement when c > 9, while the strength of the
WTS–FA geopolymer meets the TIS strength requirement even
after 12 w–d cycles and it is essentially constant when c > 3.
• This research enables WTS traditionally destined for landfill
to be used in a sustainable manner as an aggregate in geopoly-
mer masonry units. This is a significant outcome from engi-
neering, economical, and environmental perspectives. The
samples prepared at the optimum ingredient (L∶FA ¼ 1.6 and
Na2 SiO3 ∶NaOH ¼ 90∶10) and the optimum heat condition
(85°C for 72 h) provides the strength greater than 70 MPa
at 12 w–d cycles and is acceptable as durable bearing masonry
units.
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by Metropolitan Waterworks
Authority of Thailand in the fiscal year 2013, the Thailand
Research Fund under the TRF Senior Research Scholar program
Grant No. RTA5680002, the Office of Higher Education Commis-
sion under NRU project of Thailand, and Suranaree University of
Technology.
References
Akbulut, H., and Gurer, C. (2007). “Use of aggregates produced from
marble quarry waste in asphalt pavements.” Build. Environ., 42(5),
1921–1930.
Arulrajah, A., Ali, M. M. Y., Disfani, M. M., and Horpibulsuk, S. (2014a).
“Recycled glass blends in pavement base/subbase applications: labora-
tory and field evaluation.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 26(7), 1–12.
Arulrajah, A., Piratheepan, J., Disfani, M. M., and Bo, M. W. (2013). “Geo-
technical and geoenvironmental properties of recycled construction and
demolition materials in pavement subbase applications.” J. Mater. Civ.
Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000652, 1077–1088.
Arulrajah, A., Disfani, M. M., Horpibulsuk, S., Suksiripattanapong, C., and
Prongmanee, N. (2014b). “Physical properties and shear strength re-
sponse of recycled construction and demolition materials in unbound
pavement base/subbase pavement.” Constr. Build. Mater., 58, 245–257.
Arulrajah, A., Disfani, M. M., Suthagaran, V., and Imteaz, M. (2011). “Se-
lect chemical and engineering properties of wastewater biosolids.”
Waste Manage., 31(12), 2522–2526.
Arulrajah, A., Maghoolpilehrood, F., Disfani, M. M., and Horpibulsuk, S.
(2014c). “Spent coffee grounds as a non-structural embankment fill
material: Engineering and environmental considerations.” J. Cleaner
Prod., 72, 181–186.
© ASCE 04015078-8
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078
ASTM. (2000). “Standard test methods for compressive strength of molded
soil-cement cylinders.” C1633, West Conshohcken, PA.
ASTM. (2003). “Standard test methods for wetting and drying compacted
soil-cement mixtures.” C599-03, West Conshohcken, PA.
ASTM. (2005). “Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and
plasticity index of soils.” D4318, West Conshohcken, PA.
ASTM. (2012a). “Standard Specification for coal fly ash and raw or cal-
cined natural pozzolan for use in concrete.” C618-12a, West Con-
shohcken, PA.
ASTM. (2012b). “Standard test methods for laboratory compaction char-
acteristics of soil using modified effort [56,000 ft-lbf=ft3
(2,700 kN-m=m3 )].” D1557, West Conshohcken, PA.
Buchwald, A., and Kaps, Ch. (2002). “Property controlling influences on
the generation of geopolymeric binders based on clay.” Geopolymer
2002, Melbourne, Australia.
Chindaprasirt, C., Chareerat, T., and Sirivivatnanon, V. (2007). “Workabil-
ity and strength of coarse high calcium fly ash geopolymer.” Cem.
Concr. Compos., 29(3), 224–229.
Davidovits, J. (1991). “Geopolymers.” J. Therm. Anal. Calorim., 37(8),
1633–1656.
Davidovits, J., Buzzi, L., Rocher, R., Gimeno, D., Marini, C., and Tocco, S.
(1999). “Geopolymeric cenment based on low cost geologic material
results from the European Researh project GEOCIS-TEM.” Proc.,
2nd Int. Conf. Geopolymer, 83–96.
Disfani, M. M., Arulrajah, A., Bo, M. W., and Suthagaran, V. (2012).
“Environmental risks of using recycled crushed glass in road applica-
tions.” J. Cleaner Prod., 20(1), 170–179.
Du, Y. J., Jiang, N. J., Shen, S. L., and Jin, F. (2012). “Experimental in-
vestigation of influence of acid rain on leaching and hydraulic charac-
teristics of cement-based solidified/stabilized lead contaminated clay.”
J. Hazard. Mater., 225, 195–201.
Du, Y. J., Li, S. L, and Hayashi, S. (1999). “Swelling-shrinkage properties
and soil improvement of compacted expansive soil, Ning-Lian
Highway, China.” Eng. Geol., 53(3–4), 351–358.
Du, Y. J., Wei, M. L., and Jin, F. (2013). “Laboratory investigation on
strength properties of cement stabilized zinc-contaminated clay.”
Eng. Geol., 167(17), 20–26.
Grubb, D. G., Gallagher, P. M., Wartman, J., Liu, Y., and Carnivale, M. C.
(2006). “Laboratory evaluation of crushed glass-dredged material
blends.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241
(2006)132:5(562), 562–576.
Horpibulsuk, S., Katkan, W., and Apichatvullop, A. (2008). “An approach
for assessment of compaction curves of fine-grained soils at various
energies using a one point test.” Soils Found., 48(1), 115–125.
Horpibulsuk, S., Katkan, W., and Naramitkornburee, A. (2009). “Modified
Ohio’s curves: A rapid estimation of compaction curves for coarse- and
fine-grained soils.” Geotech. Test. J., 32(1), 64–75.
Horpibulsuk, S., Munsrakest, V., Udomchai, A., Chinkulkijniwat, A., and
Arulrajah, A. (2014). “Strength of sustainable non-bearing masonry
unit manufacturing from calcium carbide residue and fly ash.” Constr.
Build. Mater., 71, 210–215.
Horpibulsuk, S., Phetchuay, C., and Chinkulkijniwat, A. (2012). “Soil sta-
bilization by calcium carbide residue and fly ash.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng.,
10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000370, 184–193.
Horpibulsuk, S., Shibuya, S., Fuenkajorn, K., and Katkan, W. (2007).
“Assessment of engineering properties of Bangkok clay.” Can. Geotech.
J., 44(2), 173–187.
Huang, W. L., Lin, D. H., Chang, N. B., and Lin, K. S. (2002). “Recycling
of construction and demolition waste via a mechanical sorting process.”
Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 37(1), 23–37.
Kampala, A., and Horpibulsuk, S. (2013). “Engineering properties of
calcium carbide residue stabilized silty clay.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10
.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000618, 632–644.
Kampala, A., Horpibulsuk, S., Prongmanee, N., and Chinkulkijniwat, A.
(2014). “Influence of wet-dry cycles on compressive strength of
calcium carbide residue-fly ash stabilized clay.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng.,
10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000853, 633–643.
Landris, T. L. (2007). “Recycled glass and dredged materials.” Rep. No.
ERDC TN-DOER-T8, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer
Research and Development Center.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
 Mohapatra, R., and Rao, J. R. (2001). “Some aspects of characterisation,
utilisation and environmental effects of fly ash.” J. Chem. Technol.
Biotech., 76(1), 9–26.
Neramitkornburi, A., Horpibulsuk, S., Shen, S. L., Chinkulkijniwat, A.,
Arulrajah, A., and Disfani, M. M. (2015). “Durability against
wetting-drying cycles of sustainable lightweight cellular cemented
construction material comprising clay and fly ash wastes.” Constr.
Build. Mater., 77, 41–49.
Phetchuay, C., Horpibulsuk, S., Suksiripattanpong, C., Chinkulkijniwat,
A., Arulrajah, A., and Disfani, M. M. (2014). “Calcium carbide
residue: Alkaline activator for clay-fly ash geopolymer.” Constr. Build.
Mater., 69, 285–294.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 01/02/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Prakash, K., and Sridharan, A. (2004). “Free swell ratio and clay miner-
alogy of fine grained soils.” Geotech. Test. J., 27(2), 220–225.
Puppala, A. J., Hoyos, L. R., and Potturi, A. K. (2011). “Resilient moduli
response of moderately cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement
aggregates.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533
.0000268, 990–998.
Reddy, K. R., Hettiarachchi, H., Parakalla, N. S., Gangathulasi, J., and
Bogner, J. E. (2009). “Geotechnical properties of fresh municipal solid
waste at Orchard Hills Landfill, USA.” Waste Manage., 29(2), 952–959.
Rickard, W. D. A., Temuujin, J., and van Riessen, A. (2012). “Thermal
analysis of geopolymer pastes synthesised from five fly ashes of
variable composition.” J. Non-Cryst. Solids, 358(15), 1830–1839.
Rickard, W. D. A., Williams, R., Temuujin, J., and van Riessen, A. (2011).
“Assessing the suitability of three Australian fly ashes as an alumino-
silicate source for geopolymer in high temperature applications.” Mater.
Sci. Eng., 528(9), 3390–3397.
Sata, V., Sathonsaowaphak, A., and Chindaprasirt, P. (2012). “Resistance
of lignite bottom ash geopolymer mortar to sulfate and sulfuric acid
attack.” Cem. Concr. Compos., 34(5), 700–708.
Sukmak, P., Horppibulsuk, S., and Shen, S. L. (2013a). “Strength develop-
ment in clay-fly ash geopolymer.” Constr. Build. Mater., 40, 566–574.
© ASCE 04015078-9
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2016, 28(1): 04015078
Sukmak, P., Horppibulsuk, S., Shen, S. L., Chindaprasirt, P., and
Suksiripattqanapong, C. (2013b). “Factors influencing strength
development in clay-fly ash geopolymer.” Constr. Build. Mater., 47,
1125–1136.
Sukmak, P., Silva, P.-D., Horpibulsuk, S., and Chindaprasirt, P. (2014).
“Sulphate resistance of clay-Portland cement and clay-high calcium
fly ash geopolymer.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-
5533.0001112, 04014158.
Suksiripattanapong, C., Horpibulsuk, S., Chanprasert, P., Sukmak, P., and
Arulrajah, A. (2015). “Compressive strength development in geopoly-
mer masonsy units manufactured from water treatment sludge.” Constr.
Build. Mater., 82, 20–30.
Taha, R., Al-Harthy, A., Al-Shamsi, K., and Al-Zubeidi, M. (2002).
“Cement stabilization of reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregate for road
bases and subbases.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561
(2002)14:3(239), 239–245.
TIS. (1987). “Standard for hollow non-load bearing concrete mansonry
unit.” TIS 57-2530, Thai Industrial Standards Institute.
Van Jaarsveld, J., Van Deventer, J., and Lorenzen, L. (1998). “Factors af-
fecting the immobilization of metals in geopolymerized fly ash.” Metall.
Mater. Trans. B, 29(1), 283–291.
Wartman, J., Grubb, D. G., and Nasim, A. S. M. (2004). “Select engineer-
ing characteristics of crushed glass.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/
(ASCE)0899-1561(2004)16:6(526), 526–539.
Wongpa, J., Kiattikomol, K., Jaturapitakkul, C., and Chindaprasirt, P.
(2010). “Compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, and water per-
meability of inorganic polymer concrete.” Mater. Des., 31(10),
4748–4754.
Zekkos, D. P., Bray, J. D., Kavazanjian, E., Jr., Matasovic, N., Rathje, E.
M., and Riemer, M. F. (2006). “Unit weight of municipal solid waste.”
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)
132:10(1250), 1250–1261.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.