Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-021-00598-8

RESEARCH PAPER

Setting Time, Workability and Strength Properties of Alkali Activated

Fly Ash and Slag Based Geopolymer Concrete Activated with High
Silica Modulus Water Glass
Gugulothu Vikas1 · T. D. Gunneswara Rao1

Received: 4 October 2019 / Accepted: 31 January 2021 / Published online: 11 February 2021
© Shiraz University 2021

Abstract
Alkali activated materials are gaining the researchers attention in replacement for cement in traditional concrete. One ton
of ­CO2 is liberated into the atmosphere to produce 1 ton of cement. Therefore, cement replacement with alkali activated
materials in the construction industry decreases the pollution in two ways: reducing ­CO2 emissions in the atmosphere by
reducing cement consumption and using large quantities of industrial waste in thermal power plants and iron production
process such as fly ash and GGBS. To examine the utilization of fly ash and GGBS as a cement substitute, it is necessary
to study the standard consistency and setting time of geopolymer paste and workability as well as compressive strength of
alkali activated fly ash and slag-based geopolymer concrete. The method used to determine these tests was the same as used
for cement. Geopolymer material replaces cement in these tests, and also the activating solution water glass replaces water
completely. The variables in the present investigation are the percentage of GGBS in fly ash (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70,
80, 90 and 100), silica modulus of water glass (1.99 and 2.92) and concrete age (1, 7 and 28 days). In general, GGBS-based
geopolymer concrete is well known for its rapid setting behavior, but the use of neutral grade water glass as activator in the
present study resulted in increasing setting times which in turn increased workability of slag-based geopolymer concrete.
Results indicated that increasing the slag percentage in fly ash decreased the setting time and slump but increased the com-
pressive strength.

Keywords Geopolymer paste · Silica modulus · Neutral grade water glass · Setting time · Workability and compressive
strength

1 Introduction
In the modern age, the use of concrete is second to water.
Ordinary Portland cement (OPC) has traditionally been used
as the main binder in the manufacture of concrete due to the
presence of raw materials worldwide and ease in the ability
of molding. The use of concrete in the field of infrastructure,
habitation and transportation plays a vital role in the pro-
gress of civilization, economic development, sustainability
and quality of life to a great extent. These days, high per-
formance concrete inputs have increased concrete’s durabil-
ity and strength greatly. Environmental problems related to
* T. D. Gunneswara Rao
tdg@nitw.ac.in
1
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute
of Technology Warangal, Warangal, Telangana State, India
OPC production are known well. The carbon dioxide (­ CO2)
gas emitted during the production of OPC because of the
limestone calcination and fossil fuels combustion is around
1 ton per ton of production of OPC. Also, the energy needed
in OPC manufacture is just next to steel and aluminum. In
contrast, the wide spread availability of fly ash and slag
worldwide offers the possibility of using these by-products
from burning coal and steel manufacture process to replace
OPC in the manufacture of cement concrete products.
In the field of construction, alkali activated geopolymers
can replace OPC. Geopolymer materials are used as binders
to completely replace OPC in the production of geopolymer
concrete. For geopolymer production, source materials like
fly ash and Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS)
are activated by an alkaline solution to form Si–O–Al poly-
meric bonds. The alkali may be alkali hydroxide (MOH),
weak acid non-silicic salts ­(M2CO3, ­M2S, MF), and ­M2O.
(n)SiO2 type silicic salts and also their combinations, where

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
1484 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492
M stands for alkali metals such as Na, K, Li. Geopolymer
concrete is also referred to as in organic polymer concrete
or alkali-activated concrete. It reduces greenhouse emis-
sions by 80% from concrete industry (Davidovits et al.
1994; Daniel et al. 2006). It was reported that fly ash-based
geopolymer concrete has tremendous physical character-
istics such as initial strength, low shrinkage, high freez-
ing and thawing resistance, sulfate attack and corrosion
(Davidovits et al. 1990). A study conducted to examine the
source materials composition effect and curing process on
geopolymer physical and chemical properties has shown
that most of the elevated temperature curing cause cracking
and adversely affects the geopolymer physical properties
(VanJaarsveld et al. 2002). One more study using alkali
activated slag concrete activated with sodium silicate acti-
vator resulted in 50 MPa compressive strength (Douglas
et al. 1991b, a). Fly ash based geopolymer mortars are cured
at room temperature by adding CaO and Ca(OH)2 due to
the accumulation of compounds of calcium that enhance
mechanical properties (Temuujin et al. 2009). An engineer
Prof. Joseph and French scientist used the term ‘geopoly-
mer’ first in the 1970s (Joseph et al. 1999), and used it for
the class of solids produced by reacting the aluminosilicate
powder with an alkaline solution. Synthesis of building
materials with solid alkaline activation and non-Portland
cement precursors was demonstrated (Purdon et al. 1940).
Particularly, low calcium content coal fly ash i.e., less than
5% CaO weight, is a rich industrial by-product that is now
used around the world (Ingram et al. 2005). Slag reactions
are also known to carry small particles. Particle size more
than 20 microns reacts slowly, whereas particles of size
smaller than 2 microns fully react in mixed cements and in
alkali activated systems for about 24 h (Shi et al. 2005). It is
clear that when slag is used in geopolymerization, thorough
grain size distribution control may be used to control the
strength development profile, similar to the Portland cement
mixing (Wan et al. 2004).
Activators used in geopolymer concrete are OPC,
NaOH, ­Na 2SO 4, ­Na 2CO 3, and ­Na 2SiO 3. According to
many researchers, the best activator is liquid sodium sili-
cate i.e., water glass (Glukhovsky et al. 1980; Malolepszy
et al. 1986; Douglas et al. 1991b, a; Wang et al. 1994).
The hydration product of alkali-activated slag system
is known to be C–S–H gel (calcium silicate hydrate gel)
which has a lower ratio of Ca/Si, zeolite-type minerals and
silica gel, and this is a reaction product largely responsi-
ble for development of strength (Xue et al. 1993). Com-
pared to using alkali hydroxide alone, the soluble silicates
addition leads to a higher rate of reactivity and increases
the final binder (Duxson et al. 2007; Xu et al. 2000a and
2000b). The extra N ­ a2SiO3 added to the minerals activated
by alkaline hydroxides is necessary due to the presence of
more long chain silicate oligomers, the more precursors of
13
geopolymer are formed. Alkali silicate solution composi-
tion can be expressed as silica modulus (­ Ms) of water glass
activator, which is S ­ iO2:Na2O ratio. These are the major
components accountable for the hydration extent and gain
of strength. Several reviewed literature presented quick
setting as a major problem in alkali activated slag (AAS)-
based geopolymer concrete (Luukkonen et al. 2018). It was
reported that the AAS-based geopolymer concrete begins
to start setting in 15 min when compressive strength greater
than 70 MPa is produced without using any admixtures
(Wang et al.1991). Retarders which are used in OPC have
no effect on AAS due to various chemical composition of
slag cements. Malic acid was used in a work with AAS
mortars as a retarder (Brough et al. 2000). As quick setting
is a problem for alkali activated slag concrete, it also affects
workability.
Landrou et al. (2016) stated that the use of sodium sili-
cate as a dispersant significantly reduces the yield stress
of a paste in order to achieve better workability. As the
literature (Palacios et al. 2006; Puertas et al. 2014) shows,
rheological studies help to understand the causes of quick
setting behavior and find possible solutions. Therefore, the
understanding of workability and rheology is of fundamen-
tal importance (Amziane et al. 2005). It was stated that
best results for alkali activated slag concrete mixes were
obtained by using liquid sodium silicate with M ­ s in the
range between 1 and 2 (Tailing et al. 1989). In a previous
study, ­Ms was recommended in the range between 1 and
1.5 and N ­ a2O dosage of 3.0 to 5.5% for water glass as an
activator, while 6.1% N ­ a2O was recommended in other work
(Wang et al. 1994, 1995). Alkali activates binder where
silica ­SiO2 forms a silica gel. This indicates that the strength
increases as the silica increases for a constant ­Na2O con-
tent which shows that the higher silica modulus provides
more strength. Higher strengths were obtained for higher
silica modulus of 3.1 (Dali Bondar et al. 2011). When the
silica-sodium oxide ratio is greater than 1.5, sodium silicate
activators are much safer to handle (Elmore et al. 2004).
Increase in ­SiO2/ ­Na2O ratio has a positive effect on the
degree of polymerization (Xu et al. 2000a and 2000b).
The most important characteristic of ­Na2SiO3 is the silica
modulus of S ­ iO2 to ­Na2O. The silica modulus of com-
mercially available water glass is 1.6 to 3.85. Beyond this
range, liquid sodium silicate solution has limited stability
and impractical. pH values are the most important feature
to determine high modulus silicate solution stability, i.e., its
tendency to gel formation or coagulation (Shi et al. 2006).
Since silica gel formation contributes significantly to geo-
polymerization strength, a relationship between the silica
modulus and ­Na2O was observed. In other words, if the
amount of N ­ a2O is stable (i.e. the effect of alkaline activa-
tion may be similar) the higher the modulus, the larger the
formation of silica gel, and slightly greater is the strength.
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492 1485

However, if the solid content of sodium silicate remains Table 1  Fly ash and GGBS chemical composition (% by mass)
stable, the lower the modulus, the higher the amount of Chemical composition Fly ash GGBS
­Na2O and the higher the effect of alkaline activation, but
the lower the silica gel content. These competitive effects SiO2 60.1 34.07
lead to an optimum modulus that varies according to raw Al2O3 26.54 20.1
materials and curing conditions. If the alkaline activation Fe2O3 4.24 0.81
is insufficient and therefore leads to a slow alumino-silicate SO3 0.36 0.91
activation, the low modulus is preferable; otherwise a high CaO 4.01 32.7
module is preferable (Wang and Scrivener 1994). There- MgO 1.26 7.88
fore, in the current study, investigations were performed on Na2O 0.23 NIL
geopolymer concrete prepared with water glass of higher Loss on ignition 0.87 NIL
silica modulus 1.99 and 2.92 to improve the geopolymer
concrete workability. Using water glass solution alone as
activator is advantageous compared to the combination Clean dry river sand was used as fine aggregate. To
of blended water glass and sodium hydroxide. The cost of remove all the pebbles, it was sieved using 4.75 mm sieve.
water glass activator is very low compared to the activator The saturated surface dry specific gravity of the sand is 2.68,
prepared with blended water glass and sodium hydroxide. which confirms the zone II standards according to IS 383
The combination of sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate (1970). Coarse aggregate used was crushed granite with
as activator should be prepared one or two days before cast- maximum size of 16 mm and specific gravity 2.72. Fine-
ing, whereas the water glass single solution can be used ness modulus of fine and coarse aggregates is 2.73 and 6.33,
directly in site conditions. The preparation of activator with respectively.
sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate releases heat which
is not safe under site conditions but water glass single solu- 2.2 Solution
tion does not release any heat and is therefore safe to use.
Slag-based geopolymer concrete lacks application in the Liquid sodium silicate grades in industry are classified by
construction field due to its rapid setting behavior. It is clear their ­SiO2:Na2O silica modulus M ­ s (weight ratio) which can
from the literature that higher silica modulus of water glass range from 1.6:1 and 3.85:1. Grades with S ­ iO2:Na2O ratio
activator results in better geopolymer properties. Therefore, greater than 2.85:1 are described as neutral and those with
the study of effect of water glass silica modulus on work- less than this ratio are referred to as alkaline. Activators used
ability is necessary. This report presents the research results in the present study were medium alkaline water glass of ­Ms
on the study of standard consistency, initial setting time, 1.99 with 24.88% ­SiO2, 12.46% N ­ a2O and 62.66% H ­ 2O by
final setting time, workability and compressive strength of weight and neutral grade water glass of M ­ s 2.92 with 28.98%
fly ash- and slag-based geopolymer concrete activated with ­SiO2, 9.92% ­Na2O and 61.1% ­H2O by weight obtained from
two grades of water glass. The class F fly ash was substituted KIRAN GLOBAL Ltd, Chennai, India.
by GGBS in various proportions and the geopolymer mix
was activated with liquid sodium silicate solution of Ms 1.99 2.3 Paste
and 2.92. The outcomes will help researchers understand
geopolymer concrete performance activated by these higher The various fly ash-GGBS binder proportions by weight
­Ms of water glass. were blended in the pan mixer in dry condition. The acti-
vator solution was then added to the mixture and stirred
for about 3 min to form a homogeneous color. Geopolymer
2 Materials pastes were then prepared by altering the calcined source
material fly ash-GGBS proportions, activated with both the
2.1 Binder grades of water glass.

The binder materials used in this study are fly ash (class F)
and GGBS. Fly ash was obtained from Ramagundam ther-
mal power plant, India, and GGBS was procured from JSW
Cements, Hyderabad, India. The specific gravity of fly ash
and GGBS is 2.17 and 2.93, and the fineness is 380 m2/kg
and 426 m2/kg, respectively. Table 1 shows the chemical
composition of fly ash and GGBS.
2.4 Geopolymer Concrete
Binder, fine and coarse aggregate were dry mixed for
2–3 min. The activator was then added to a dry mixture
and mixed for 5 to 7 min until a uniform mixture was
obtained. Fresh properties such as slump and density were
measured and concrete specimens were then cast, followed

13
1486 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492

by compaction and vibration of fresh concrete. Steel molds
of dimensions 100 mm × 100 mm × 100 mm size cubes
were used for casting cube concrete specimens. To deter-
mine 1, 7 and 28-day compressive strengths, nine cubes
were molded for each geopolymer mix. To determine the
compressive strength of geopolymer concrete, 22 mixes
of 198 cubes were cast. The samples were demolded 24 h
after casting and placed under room temperature curing
conditions (27 ± 2 °C, 70% relative humidity) until the day
of the test. The parameters considered in the present inves-
tigation are: (1) percentage of GGBS replaced with fly ash
(0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 and 100); (2) Silica
modulus of water glass (1.99 and 2.92) and (3) curing age
(1, 7 and 28 days).
3 Experimental Program
the workability of geopolymer mix. Nine cubes of each geo-
polymer mix with size 100 mm × 100 mm × 100 mm were
cast and tested in compression to determine the compres-
sive strength for 1, 7 and 28 days. The compression test was
performed according to IS 516 (1959) using a Tinius-Olsen
testing machine of 2000kN capacity. As no particular mix
design is available for geopolymer concrete, the adopted
mix design methodology was almost same as ordinary
concrete mix design. The amount of binder content was
fixed as 500 kg/m3, and the ratio of solution/binder for the
preparation of different concrete mixes was fixed as 0.6. The
aggregate role in geopolymer was considered to be similar
to that of OPC concrete. Considering the aggregate medium
as inert, the aggregate ratio of fine aggregate to coarse
aggregate was taken as 0.45:0.55 because the maximum dry
density of mixed aggregate was achieved at this ratio. The
required quantities and mix proportions of source materials,
aggregates and solution were determined as shown below.

The study focuses on basic properties, such as standard 3.1 Mix Design

consistency (P) and setting time performed on geopolymer
paste; secondly, slump and compressive strength tests con-
ducted on geopolymer concrete to determine workability and
strength of concrete. According to IS 4031(part 4) (1988),
standard consistency of cement is determined by Vicat’s
apparatus. Similar method was used to test the geopolymer
material, and activators were used to make geopolymer paste
of standard consistency. The initial and final setting times for
the geopolymer paste were tested according to IS 4031 (part
5) (1988) using Vicat’s apparatus. Geopolymer paste setting
times were determined by taking fly ash-GGBS binder pro-
portions as 500 g and 0.85 times the standard consistency
value, i.e., 0.85 P.
Slump test was performed on the basis of IS 1199 (1959)
using a metallic slump mold to determine the workability
of all concrete mixtures. The level difference between the
For 1 ­m3 of concrete.
Binder was taken as 500 kg/m3 and the ratio of solution /
binder was taken as 0.6.
The activator solution was calculated by multiply-
ing the solution/binder ratio by the binder content, i.e.,
0.6 × 500 = 300 kg/m3.
Unit weight of concrete is 25 kN/m3 or 2500 kg/m3.
Total aggregate = 2500 − 500 − 300 = 1700 kg.
The ratio of Fine aggregate/Coarse aggregate = 45:55.
Coarse aggregate = 1700 × 0.55 = 935 kg.
Fine aggregate = 1700 × 0.45 = 765 kg.
Binder content = 500 kg/m3, Fine aggregate = 765 kg,
Coarse aggregate = 935 kg, Solution = 300 kg/m3.
Therefore, Binder: Fine Aggregate: Coarse Aggregate:
Solution: 1: 1.53: 1.87: 0.6

Density of concrete × cube size × No.of cubes × Factor of safety

For one mix, the total binder weight for 9 cubes =
Sum of the ratio of each material
2500 × 0.13 × 9 × 1.2
= = 5.4 kg
1 + 1.53 + 1.87 + 0.6

height of the mold and the highest point of the subsided con- Hence, total material for one mix,
crete was measured and reported as slump. The concrete is Binder = 5.4 kg/m3, Fine Aggregate = 8.26 kg, Coarse
compacted and vibrated in molds after measuring the fresh Aggregate = 10.09 kg, Activator solution = 3.24 kg/m3.
density. Vibration time is usually 10 to 30 s, depending on

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492 1487

Table 2  Consistency and setting Mix ID/Proportion Standard consistency (%) Initial setting time (min) Final setting time (min)
times of geopolymer paste for of binders
various binder proportions Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92

M1F100G0 31 33 1085 1210 1770 1900

M2F90G10 31 34 940 1050 1520 1750
M3F80G20 32 36 720 895 1280 1550
M4F70G30 34 37 540 735 990 1300
M5F60G40 37 39 490 610 865 1150
M6F50G50 39 42 365 520 705 1000
M7F40G60 39 44 295 450 575 870
M8F30G70 41 46 220 345 410 650
M9F20G80 43 48 165 230 290 430
M10F10G90 45 48 85 170 165 320
M11F0G100 45 49 27 125 50 205

4 Results and Discussion water glass (­ Ms 1.99). It was clear from the discussion that
the fly ash-GGBS combinations and the activator type used
4.1 Standard Consistency influences the standard consistency of geopolymer paste.

Standard consistency of the geopolymer paste is defined as 4.2 Setting Time

the activator percentage that can penetrate Vicat’s apparatus
plunger of 10 mm diameter to a depth of 33–35 mm from
the top of the Vicat’s mold. The device consists of a steel
needle that penetrates the paste with a prescribed weight
of 300 ± 1 g. The penetration was repeated every ten min-
utes, the sample being stored at a controlled temperature
(20 ± 2)0C and 90% relative humidity. Standard consistency
values for various combinations of binder activated with
two grades of water glass are presented in Table 2, where
­M1F100G0 to M ­ 11F0G100 indicates geopolymer mix ID and
fly ash-GGBS binder proportions. It was noted that standard
consistency of the geopolymer paste mix M ­ 1F100G0 requires
less activator than the geopolymer paste mix ­M11F0G100.
For intermediate mixes, with increase in GGBS content,
standard consistency value increases. This behavior may
be because of the spherical shape of fly ash particles and
has low internal friction, resulting in Vicat’s plunger free
movement for lesser content of activator. In contrast, the
slag particles are straight, flaky elongated shape with sharp
edged angularity, rough surface texture that have larger
internal friction than the particles of fly ash, and therefore
require more solution to attain standard consistency. For
geopolymer mixes activated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99,
the standard consistency was observed to be 33% for the
mix ­M1F100G0 and 49% for the mix ­M11F0G100. Whereas,
for the geopolymer mixes activated with water glass of ­Ms
2.92, the standard consistency was observed to be 31% for
the mix ­M1F100G0 and 45% for the mix ­M11F0G100. Also,
the consistency values were observed to be more for all the
mixes activated with neutral grade water glass (­ Ms 2.92)
compared to the other mixes activated with medium alkaline
Geopolymer setting behavior was studied by varying fly
ash-GGBS proportions. Initial and final setting time of the
geopolymer paste is reported in this study. The method
used was the same as the method used to determine initial
and final setting time of cement. Variation of initial and
final setting time of geopolymer paste for several combi-
nations of fly ash and GGBS is shown in Table 2. For the
geopolymer mixes activated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99,
initial setting time from M ­ 1F100G0 to M­ 11F0G100 is 1085 to
27 min and the final setting time is 1770 to 50 min, respec-
tively. Whereas, for the geopolymer mixes activated with
water glass of M ­ s 2.92, initial setting time from M ­ 1F100G0
to ­M11F0G100 ranges from 1210 to 125 min and the final
setting time varies from 1900 to 205 min, respectively. It
can be noted that slag based geopolymer mix activated
with neutral grade liquid sodium silicate increased final
setting time which usually has a final setting time value
of 20 min when activated with regular alkaline solution
i.e., the combination of NaOH and N ­ a 2SiO 3. It is clear
that GGBS easily reacts with the solution than the fly ash.
GGBS setting aspects with liquid are quicker when com-
pared with the fly ash. Therefore, slag is a better source
than fly ash for the development of geopolymer materi-
als with high initial strength. For the geopolymer mixes
activated with water glass of M ­ s 1.99, GGBS replaced
partially with fly ash by 10% reduced the initial setting
time from 1085 to 940 min and the final setting time from
1770 to 1520 min. Whereas, for the geopolymer mixes
activated with water glass of ­Ms 2.92, the initial setting
time is reduced from 1210 to 1050 min and the final set-
ting time is reduced from 1900 to 1750 min. For the mix

13
1488 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492

activated with neutral grade water glass, higher setting
time was observed. Therefore, it can be concluded that
an appropriate fly ash-GGBS combination prepared with
high silica modulus water glass can be suggested to have
a preferred setting time value.
Geopolymer paste setting times were determined based on
IS: 4031–1988 (part 5) by taking fly ash and GGBS binder
combinations as 500 g and liquid content as 0.85P, where P
is the standard consistency value of that particular geopoly-
mer mix. For the geopolymer mixes activated with water
glass of M­ s 1.99, as the consistency of the geopolymer paste
­M1F100G0 was 31%, the liquid content used to estimate initial
and final setting time was 0.85 P i.e., 0.85 × 31 = 26.35%,
whereas for the geopolymer paste ­MP11F0G100, as the con-
sistency was 45%, the amount of solution used was 0.85 P
i.e., 0.85 × 45 = 38.25%. Similarly, for the geopolymer mixes
activated with water glass of ­Ms 2.92, as the consistency of
the geopolymer paste M ­ 1F100G0 was 33%, the amount of
liquid used to estimate initial and final setting time was 0.85
P (0.85 × 33 = 28.05%), whereas for the paste M ­ 11F0G100, as
the consistency is 49%, the amount of solution used was 0.85
P (0.85 × 49 = 41.65%). The decrease in the setting time of
the geopolymer paste M ­ 11F0G100 may be due to the differ-
ence in chemical composition of fly ash and GGBS.
4.3 Workability
Activation of fly ash and GGBS with water glass achieved
a good workability for all the mixes. With increase in the
GGBS % in fly ash, decrease in slump was observed as
shown in Table 3. The decrease in workability was due to
decrease in setting time of geopolymer mix from M
­ 1F100G0
to ­M11F0G100. The values of workability were relatively
higher than the expected values of OPC concrete. High val-
ues of geopolymer concrete slump are due to the presence
of silicates, which give the mix an adhesive character. For
the geopolymer mixes activated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99,
slump values from ­M1F100G0 to ­M11F0G100 varied between
218 and 0 mm. Similarly, for the geopolymer mixes activated
with water glass of ­Ms 2.92, slump values from ­M1F100G0
to ­M11F0G100 varied between 230 and 120 mm. Table 3 also
shows the variation of workability of the geopolymer mixes
with respect to time for both grades of water glass mixes.
Slump values were recorded for 30 min, 60 min, 90 min
and 120 min for all the mixes. For the geopolymer mixes
activated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99, slump values from
­M1F100G0 to ­M11F0G100 at the time of mixing were ranged
between 218 and 0 mm. After 30 min, it was ranged between
116 and 0 mm. The range of slump values from M ­ 1F100G0
to ­M11F0G100 after 60 min was 60 to 0 mm and after 90 min,
it varied from 26 to 0 mm. In the same way, for the geo-
polymer mixes activated with water glass of M ­ s 2.92, slump
values from ­M1F100G0 to ­M11F0G100 at the time of mix-
ing was ranged between 230 and 120 mm. After 30 min, it
was ranged between 125 and 58 mm. The range of slump
values from ­M1F100G0 to ­M11F0G100 after 60 min was 64
to 26 mm and after 90 min, it varied from 30 to 10 mm.
Slump of all the mixes were measured as zero at 120 min
from the time of mixing. It was observed that for the geo-
polymer mix M ­ 11F0G100 prepared with water glass of M ­ s
1.99, even though the initial setting time was 27 min, the
slump observed at 0 min was almost zero slump. The con-
crete was observed to be shrinking down very slowly during
the test. Similarly, the initial setting time of the geopolymer
mix ­M11F0G100 prepared with water glass of M ­ s 2.92 was
observed as 125 min and the slump at 0 min was observed
as 120 mm. This increase in setting time and workability
for geopolymer mix prepared with water glass ­Ms 1.99 and
­Ms 2.92 may be due to the more S ­ iO2% in water glass of
­Ms 2.92. The rate of decrease in slump over time decreased

Table 3  Slump values with time for different binder proportions and water glass
Mix ID/Propor- Slump (mm) at 0 min Slump (mm) at 30 min Slump (mm) at 60 min Slump (mm) at 90 min Slump (mm) at
tion of binders 120 min
Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92

M1F100G0 218 230 116 125 60 64 26 30 0 0

M2F90G10 205 218 106 112 53 58 22 26 0 0
M3F80G20 197 205 97 105 48 53 20 24 0 0
M4F70G30 182 192 91 98 42 50 18 21 0 0
M5F60G40 170 180 87 93 40 46 16 20 0 0
M6F50G50 154 166 78 85 37 43 15 18 0 0
M7F40G60 146 155 72 78 33 38 13 17 0 0
M8F30G70 138 145 68 74 31 36 11 15 0 0
M9F20G80 124 134 60 68 28 33 9 14 0 0
M10F10G90 95 126 48 63 22 30 0 12 0 0
M11F0G100 0 120 0 58 0 26 0 10 0 0

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492 1489

with increase in the GGBS % in fly ash due to the fast set-
ting behavior of GGBS compared to fly ash. Generally, with
regular alkaline activators, water is added to raise workabil-
ity of geopolymer mix for longer time, while the use of neu-
tral grade sodium silicate improved workability of the mix
without using additional water.
In general, setting time depends on the precursors and
activator composition, which affects workability. It has been
reported that rheological behavior is influenced by the type
of activator used (Zivica et al. 2007). In the regular process
of alkali-activation, exhibits strong alkalinity of activator
initially results in the release of silicon and calcium from
GGBS that are diffused through the reaction products outer
layer and formed quickly over the particles which are unre-
acted. Alkaline conditions improve the activation process
and also the solubility of silicon and calcium because the
presence of hydroxide stimulates the dissolution of GGBS.
GGBS particles are dissolved in a short time resulting in
a short initial setting time of geopolymer paste. However,
when the commercial water glass solution is used as activa-
tor, the geopolymer paste performance was peculiar. Accord-
ing to the literature (Huanhai et al. 1993; Rodriguez-Puertas
et al. 2014), as soon as the slag grains are exposed to sodium
silicate solution, they are surrounded by a thin layer of pri-
mary C–S–H gel as a result of silicate ions interaction in the
solution with ­Ca2+ ions in GGBS. The slag grains are then
bonded by Vander Waals forces. In the initial stages of the
rheological tests, these flocs were separated partly, however
the rapid and large precipitations of the primary C–S–H gel
continued to form larger flocs. Under the experimental con-
ditions, the constant mixing of sample leads to flocs break-
age that explains the shear stress reduction. This increases
the paste flow and thus improves workability. It has been
reported that the use of sodium silicate as dispersant may
significantly decrease the yield stress of the paste to achieve
proper workability (Landrou et al. 2016). This can be useful
for applications in structural material as it provides longer
time for handling and placing fresh material.
4.4 Compressive Strength
Table 4 presents the 1-day, 7- and 28 days compressive
strengths of geopolymer concretes of several fly ash and
GGBS proportions activated with two grades of water glass.
For geopolymer concrete mixes activated with water glass of
­Ms 1.99, the compressive strength of the mixes ­M1F100G0 to
­M11F0G100 for one day, ranges from 1.22 to 44.73 MPa, for
seven days it ranges from 4.87 to 73.81 MPa and for 28 days,
it varies from 11.5 to 88.4 MPa, respectively. Similarly, for
geopolymer concrete mixes activated with water glass of
­Ms 2.92, the compressive strength of the mixes ­M1F100G0 to
­M11F0G100 for one day, ranges from 1.92 to 48.3 MPa, for
seven days it ranges from 7.33 to 78.2 MPa and for 28 days,
it varies from 16.2 to 93.2 MPa, respectively. As the GGBS
percentage in binder increases, increase in the concrete com-
pressive strength was observed and similar behavior was
reported for geopolymer mortars (Mallikarjuna Rao et al.
2015). Total fly ash replacement by GGBS at 28 days has
shown maximum compressive strength of 93.2 MPa. The
larger amount of calcium content present in GGBS is the
reason for the increased compressive strength (Yip et al.
2001).
There are two possible mechanisms for hydration reac-
tions: (1) a slag hydration reaction and a fly ash polymeriza-
tion occur separately from one another, or (2) two reactions
occur at the same time (Wardhono et al. 2014). In the first
case, it was assumed that the GGBS reacted first by form-
ing a matrix around the fly ash, and filling the fly ash pores,
resulting in greater strength. However, secondly, both reac-
tions take place simultaneously during the GGBS reaction,
that activates fly ash at ambient temperature. Table 5 shows
strength gain in 1 and 7 days in % of 28 day strength. The

Table 4  Compressive strength Mix ID/Proportion 1 day compressive strength 7 day compressive strength 28 day compressive
of geopolymer concrete for of binders strength
different ages
Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92

M1F100G0 1.22 1.92 4.87 7.33 11.5 16.2

M2F90G10 3.22 5.4 8.26 12.6 16.8 24.6
M3F80G20 6.31 9.42 13.69 18.5 24.2 31.4
M4F70G30 11.22 14.6 20.67 26.4 31.9 38.8
M5F60G40 15.16 21.1 26.6 34.4 38.5 48.5
M6F50G50 18.21 23.4 32.13 39.1 44.2 52.2
M7F40G60 22.7 26.7 39.7 43.5 52.1 58.1
M8F30G70 27.3 31.4 47.5 53.2 60.5 66.5
M9F20G80 32.46 36.2 54.96 61.1 68.2 74.7
M10F10G90 37.6 41.6 61.9 68.3 75.8 82.9
M11F0G100 44.73 48.3 73.81 78.2 88.4 93.2

13
1490 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492

Table 5  Age of concrete as a Mix ID/Proportion Age of concrete 1 to 28 days Age of concrete 7 to 28 days 28 days (%)
percentage of 28 days strength of binders (%) (%)
Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92 Ms 1.99 Ms 2.92

M1F100G0 10.6 11.9 42.4 45.3 100 100

M2F90G10 19.2 21.98 49.2 51.3 100 100
M3F80G20 26.1 30 56.6 59.1 100 100
M4F70G30 35.2 37.8 64.8 68.28 100 100
M5F60G40 39.4 43.6 69.1 71.1 100 100
M6F50G50 41.2 44.9 72.7 75 100 100
M7F40G60 43.6 46.09 76.2 78.1 100 100
M8F30G70 45.2 47.27 78.5 80 100 100
M9F20G80 47.6 48.58 80.6 81.8 100 100
M10F10G90 49.6 50.28 81.7 82.4 100 100
M11F0G100 50.6 51.91 83.5 84 100 100

initial age strengths are observed to be different for differ- 5 Conclusions

ent fly ash-GGBS mixes. The rate of gain in strength of
various fly ash-GGBS combinations is also different. It was
noted that the strength gain rate at an early age is faster for
the geopolymer mix ­M11F0G100 was more than that of geo-
polymer mix ­M1F100G0. Initial curing temperature affects
the polymerization process. The geopolymer mix ­M1F100G0
activated with water glass of M­ s 1.99 has the lowest 28 days
compressive strength of 11.5 MPa when compared to other
mixes and the mix ­M11F0G100 activated with water glass of
­Ms 2.92 exhibits maximum 28 days strength of 93.2 MPa.
The strength development of M ­ 11F0G100 mix activated with
water glass of M ­ s 2.92 shows the higher initial strength of
48.3 MPa in one day age (51.91% of final strength) and
achieved a strength of 78.2 MPa in seven days (84% of final
strength). Similarly, the strength development of ­M1F100G0
mix activated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99 shows the lowest
early strength of 1.22 MPa in one day age (10.6% of final
strength) and achieved a strength of 4.87 MPa in seven days
(42.4% of final strength). Hence, it is clear that the high
molar ratio silicates (i.e., neutral grade) are more suitable
for the chemical bond because it is the siliceous part of the
silicate which reacts with cations.
In general, the results show that as the GGBS content
increases, the initial and final strengths increase signifi-
cantly. This indicates that GGBS is a major factor in increas-
ing the initial strength gain, while fly ash contributes to
increased strength over time. This is in accordance with
the data reported on slag-based geopolymer concrete, that
was found to provide a high early strength, which in general
achieves less further strength (Nath et al. 2014). While fly
ash based geopolymer materials in general need oven curing
to gain larger strength, they often do not achieve structural
integrity at ambient temperatures which is very useful for
the construction field because the formwork can be removed
early in the site.
1. GGBS activated with neutral grade water glass was very
successful in increasing initial and final setting times,
preventing rapid setting of slag -based geopolymer con-
crete. No retarders or water reducers were used in the
concrete mix to increase the setting time.
2. For the development of geopolymer concrete from work-
ability point of view, fly ash and GGBS activation with
neutral grade sodium silicate is a possible solution to
achieve good slump.
3. The increase in the GGBS percentage in binder reduces
the setting time and workability of the geopolymer con-
crete but increases the concrete compressive strength.
This behavior is observed to be same for the geopolymer
concretes prepared with both the activators.
4. The fly ash-based geopolymer concrete demonstrates the
highest slump with low compressive strength and it is
reverse in slag-based geopolymer concrete for both the
activators.
5. The reaction rate of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete
at an early age is lower than at a later age. However, for
slag based geopolymer mix, the initial age reaction rate
of concrete is much higher than its further age.
6. The fresh density value of geopolymer concrete ranged
from 2500 to 2600 kg/m3. It was noted that the density
of geopolymer concrete was relatively higher than that
of OPC concrete.
7. Geopolymer mixes that contain high fly ash proportions
can still be cured successfully in ambient conditions.
This indicates that the combination of fly ash and slag
provides a solution to the need of oven curing for geo-
polymer concrete.
8. Geopolymer mixes activated with water glass of M ­ s
2.92 achieved best results in concrete workability and

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492
strength point of view when compared to the mixes acti-
vated with water glass of ­Ms 1.99.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author
states that there is no conflict of interest.
References
Amziane S, Ferraris CF, Koehler EP (2005) Measurement of work-
ability of fresh concrete using a mixing truck. J Res NatlInst Stand
Technol 110:55–66
Bondar D, Lynsdale CJ, Milestone NB, Hassani N, Ramezanianpour
AA (2011) Effect of type, form, and dosage of activators on
strength of alkali-activated natural pozzolans. CemConcr Res
33(2):251–260
Brough AR, Holloway M, Sykes J, Atkinson A (2000) Sodium sili-
cate-based alkali-activated slag mortars part II the retarding effect
of additions of sodium chloride or malic acid. CemConcr Res
30:1375–1379
Daniel K, Sanjayan J, Sagoe-Crentsil K (2006) The behavior of geopol-
ymer paste and concrete at elevated temperatures. In: international
conference on Pozzolan, Concrete and Geopolymer, KhonKaen,
Thailand, pp. 105–118
Davidovits J (1994) Properties of geopolymer cements. In: first inter-
national conference on Alkaline cements and concretes, SRIBM,
Kiev State Technical University, Kiev, Ukraine, pp.131–149
Davidovits J, Comrie DC, Paterson JH, Ritcey DJ (1990) Geopoly-
meric concretes for environmental protection. ACI ConcrInt J
12(7):30–40
Douglas E, Bilodeau A, Brandstetr J (1991a) Alkali activated ground
granulated blast-furnace slag concrete: preliminary investigation.
CemConcr Res 21:101–108
Douglas E, Bilodeau A, Brandstetr J, Malhotra VM (1991b) Alkali acti-
vated ground granulated blast furnace slag concrete: preliminary
investigation. CemConcr Res 21(1):101–108
Duxson P, Fernandez-Jimenez A, Provis JL, Lukey GC, Palomo A, Van
Deventer SJ (2007) Geopolymer technology: the current state of
the art. J Mater Sci 42:2917–2933
Elmore AR (2004) Final report on the safety assessment of potassium
silicate, sodium metasilicate, and sodium silicate. Int J Toxicol
24:103–117
Glukhovsky VD (1980) High strength slag-alkaline cements. 7th Inter
Congr Chem Cem, Paris, 3:164-V168
Huanhai Z, Xuecuan W, Zhongzi X, Minshu T (1993) Kinetic study of
hydration of alkali-activated slag. CemConcr Res 23:1253
Ingram C, Crookes B (2005) Inorganic polymer technology: techni-
cal overview and market study of key raw materials. Department
of Chemical and Bio Molecular Engineering, The University of
Melbourne, Australia, p 157
IS 383 (1970) Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural
sources for concrete. Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi
IS 1199 (1959) Methods of Sampling and Analysis of Concrete. Bureau
of Indian Standards, New Delhi
IS 4031 (part 4) (1988) Method of physical tests for hydraulic cement-
Determination of consistency of standard cement paste. Bureau
of Indian Standards, New Delhi
IS 4031 (part 5) (1988) Method of physical tests for hydraulic cement-
Determination of initial and final setting times. Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
1491
IS 516 (1959) Indian standard code of practice-Methods of tests for
strength of concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
Joseph (1999) Chemistry of geopolymeric systems, terminology, geo-
polymer international conference. In: James, C (ed), France, pp.
9–40
Landrou G, Brumaud C, Winnefeld F, Flatt RJ, Habert G (2016) Lime
as an anti-plasticizer for self-compacting clay concrete. Materi-
als 9:330
Luukkonen T, Abdollahnejad Z, Yliniemi J, Kinnunen P, Illikainen M
(2018) One part alkali-activated materials: a review. CemConcr
Res 103:21–34
Malolepszy J, Petri M (1986) High strength slag-alkaline binder. 8th
Inter Congr Chem Cem, Rio de Janeiro, 4:108-111
Nath P, Sarker PK (2014) Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and
early strength properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in
ambient condition. Constr Build Mater 66:163–171
Palacios M (2006) Efecto de aditivosorgánicos en laspropiedades de los
cementos y morterosdeescoriaactivadaalcalinamente. PhD thesis,
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Puertas F, Varga C (2014) Rheology of alkali-activated slag pastes
Effect of the nature and concentration of the activating solution.
Cement Concr Compos 53:279–288
Purdon AO (1940) The action of alkalis on blast-furnace slag. J Soc-
ChemInd Trans Commun 59:191–202
Rao GM, Rao TG (2015) Final setting time and compressive strength
of fly ash and GGBS-based geopolymer paste and mortar. Arab J
SciEng 40(11):3067–3074
Rodriguez-Puertas C (2014) Comportamientoreologico y mecanico de
pastas y morteros de cementos eco-eficientes. Reutilizacionder-
esiduosvitreos, Proyecto Fin de Carrera-UPM-CSIC
Shi C, Wu Y, Riefler C, Wang H (2005) Characteristics and pozzolanic
reactivity of glass powders. CemConcr Res 35:987–999
Shi C, Krivenko PV, Roy D (2006) Alkali-activated cement and con-
cretes. Taylor & Francis, London and New York
Tailing B, Brandstetr J (1989) Present state and future of alkali-
activated slag concretes. 3rd Inter Con Fly Ash, Silica Fume,
Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete, Trondheim, 2 SP
114–74:1519–1546
Temuujin J, van Riessen A, Williams R (2009) Influence of calcium
compounds on the mechanical properties of fly ash geopolymer
pastes. J Hazard Mater 167:82–88
VanJaarsveld JGS, van Deventer JSJ, Lukey GC (2002) The effect
of composition and temperature on the properties of fly ash and
kaolinite-based geopolymers. ChemEng J 89:63–73
Wan H, Shui Z, Lin Z (2004) Analysis of geometric characteristics of
GGBS particles and their influences on cement properties. Cem-
Concr Res 34:133–137
Wang SD (1991) Review of recent research on alkali-activated concrete
in China. Mag Concr Res 43(154):29–35
Wang SD, Scrivener KL (1994) Comment on “Activation of ground
blast furnace slag by alkali-metal and alkaline-earth hydroxides.”
Am Ceram Soc 77(4):11–16
Wang ShD, Scrivener KL, Pratt PL (1994) Factors affecting the
strength of alkali activated slag. CemConcr Res 24:1033–1043
Wang SD, Pu X, Scrivener KL, Pratt PL (1995) Alkali-activated
slag cement and concrete: a review of properties and problems.
AdvCem Res 27:93–102
Wardhono A, Law DW, Molyneaux DCK (2014) The mechanical prop-
erties of fly ash geopolymer in long term performance. In: the
CIC2014 “concrete innovation conference", Oslo, Norway
Xu H, Van Deventer JSJ (2000a) The geo-polymerization of alumino-
silicate minerals. Int J Miner Process 59:247–266
Xu H, Van Deventer JSJ (2000b) The geo-polymerization of alumino-
silicate minerals. Int J Miner Process 59:247–266
13
1492 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering (2021) 45:1483–1492

Xue X, Stebbins JF (1993) 23Na NMR chemical shifts and local Na Zivica V (2007) Effects of type and dosage of alkaline activator and
coordination environments in silicate crystals, melts and glass. temperature on the properties of alkali-activated slag mixtures.
PhysChem Minerals 20:297–307 Constr Build Mater 21:1463–1469
Yip CK, Van Deventer JSJ (2001) Effect of granulated blast furnace
slag on geopolymerisation. In: proceedings of 6th world congress
of chemical engineering, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 23–27

13