Objective: This paper manages the quality properties of geopolymer concrete. The primary point of this anticipate is to utilize ground granulated impact heater slag and fly fiery remains set up of common Portland concrete, keeping in mind the end goal to decrease carbon dioxide emanation. Method: From this, we can look at the properties of geopolymer concrete with bond concrete. The fixings utilized as a part of this anticipate are GGBS and Fly cinder. Sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate are utilized as basic activators. The molarity of sodium hydroxide is 8M and 10M. The proportion of soluble activators is 1:2. Calcium silicate is framed when GGBS gets responded with sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate. This calcium silicate goes about as a cover for coarse total and fine total. Findings: The response is said to be exothermic since the warmth is developed when calcium silicate is framed. Henceforth, the underlying warmth is not required to begin the polymerization procedure. The fly fiery remains and GGBS are supplanted in 5 distinctive extents (100% GGBS, 75% GGBS &25% Fly cider, half GGBS &50% Fly slag, 25% GGBS&75% Fly powder,). The curing is finished by putting examples at room temperature. Application: The examples are tried at 7 years old and 28 days, the test incorporates compressive quality, split elasticity, and flexure quality to contrast the outcomes and bond concrete.

1. http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 602 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2017, pp. 602–609, Article ID: IJCIET_08_01_069
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON PROPERTIES OF
GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE WITH GGBS AND FLY ASH
V. Keerthy
M. Tech Student, Department of Civil Engineering,
K L University, Vaddeswaram-522502, A.P, India
Y. Himath Kumar
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
KL University, Vaddeswaram, 522502, A.P, India
ABSTRACT
Objective: This paper manages the quality properties of geopolymer concrete. The primary point of
this anticipate is to utilize ground granulated impact heater slag and fly fiery remains set up of common
Portland concrete, keeping in mind the end goal to decrease carbon dioxide emanation. Method: From
this, we can look at the properties of geopolymer concrete with bond concrete. The fixings utilized as a
part of this anticipate are GGBS and Fly cinder. Sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate are utilized as
basic activators. The molarity of sodium hydroxide is 8M and 10M. The proportion of soluble activators
is 1:2. Calcium silicate is framed when GGBS gets responded with sodium hydroxide and sodium
silicate. This calcium silicate goes about as a cover for coarse total and fine total. Findings: The
response is said to be exothermic since the warmth is developed when calcium silicate is framed.
Henceforth, the underlying warmth is not required to begin the polymerization procedure. The fly fiery
remains and GGBS are supplanted in 5 distinctive extents (100% GGBS, 75% GGBS &25% Fly cider,
half GGBS &50% Fly slag, 25% GGBS&75% Fly powder,). The curing is finished by putting examples
at room temperature. Application: The examples are tried at 7 years old and 28 days, the test
incorporates compressive quality, split elasticity, and flexure quality to contrast the outcomes and bond
concrete.
Key words: GGBS, Fly Ash, Geopolymer Concrete, Alkaline Activators, Polymerization, Molarity.
Cite this Article: V. Keerthy and Y. Himath Kumar, Experimental Studies On Properties of Geopolymer
Concrete with GGBS and Fly Ash. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(1),
2017, pp. 602–609.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1

2. Experimental Studies On Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with GGBS and Fly Ash
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 603 editor@iaeme.com
1. INTRODUCTION
Concrete, the second most utilized material as a part of the world after the water. Common Portland Cement
(OPC) has turned into an essential material underway of solid which goes about as a cover to tie all the total
together1. Be that as it may, the use of bond causes contamination to nature and lessening of the crude material
(limestone). In India, around 2.10 lakh a huge number of metric huge amounts of CO2 is discharged in the
previous years. To deliver natural well-disposed cement, these materials are supplanted with modern by items,
such as fly-powder, GGBS (Ground granulated impact Blast Furnace slag) and others. Considered to this, the
new innovation, Geopolymer cement is a promising strategy2. The geopolymer development is given broad
certification for the application in strong industry as a choice clasp to Portland bond. In this development, the
source material that is rich in silicon (Si) and Aluminum (Al) gets reacted with a significant stomach settling
agent game plan through the strategy of geo polymerization to convey limiting material. GGBS (Ground
Granulated Blast Slag) is a waste material made in iron or Slag Industries which have a significant impact on
Strength and Durability of geopolymer concrete. Geopolymer is generally called 'inorganic polymer', which is
ascended a "green" catch by wide conceivable outcomes for amassing efficient supplies for biological,
determined and improvement applications3-5
. The exertion was made to think about the quality parameters of
geopolymer concrete.
2. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
• To make a concrete without using cement (i.e. Geopolymer concrete).
• To evaluate the different strength properties of geopolymer concrete mixture of GGBS and fly ash replaced in
percentage to cement.
• This item helps in lessening the carbon emanations brought about by the traditional concrete.
3. MATERIALS USED
• Fly ash
• chemicals
• ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS)
• NaOH
• Na2SiO3
• Aggregates
Coarse aggregate (10mm)
Fine aggregate.
3.1. MATERIALS
The materials used for the study are shown in Figure1.

3. V. Keerthy and Y. Himath Kumar
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 604 editor@iaeme.com
Figure 1 Materials used for study
3.2. FLY ASH
Fly fiery debris is the waste item gotten from warm power plants, as a buildup from blazing of coal in theaters
and trains. It is acquired as powder6,7. It is a decent pozzolana and the shade of fly fiery remains is either dark
or blackish dim.
3.3. GGBS:
Ground granulated impact heater slag is a by-result of iron and steel in impact heater to create a shiny, granular
item that is then dried and ground into a fine powder. The chemical composition of GGBS and Fly ash are
tabulated in Table 1-2.
Table 1. Chemical composition for GGBS
S. NO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS (GGBS) % OF COMPOSITION
1 Magnesium Oxide 8.78
2 Sulphur Content 0.41
3 Sulphide Sulphur 0.48
4 Loss on Ignition 0.68
5 Insoluble Residue 0.48
6 Chloride 0.014
7 Moisture Content 0.40
8 Manganese Content 0.20
9 Glass content 93.00
10 Chemical Moduli
a) CaO + Mgo + SiO2 77.84
b) (CaO + Mgo)/ SiO2 1.31
c) CaO / SiO2 1.10
Table 2. Chemical composition of FLY ASH
S.NO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS (FLY ASH) % OF COMPOSITION
1 Al2O3 27
2 SiO2 48.8
3 CaO 6.2
4 Fe2O3 10.2
5 K2O 0.85
6 MgO 1.4
7 Na2O 0.37
8 P2O5 1.2
9 TiO2 1.3
10 BaO 0.19
11 SrO 0.16
12 SO3 0.22
13 Loss On ignition 1.7

4. Experimental Studies On Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with GGBS and Fly Ash
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 605 editor@iaeme.com
3.4. ALKALINE ACTIVATORS
The combination of these like Sodium Silicate (Na2SiO3) and Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) are utilized as basic
arrangements activators8
.
3.5. COARSE AGGREGATE
The totals which are held on 4.75mm utilized (IS strainers) are termed as coarse totals. 10mm size of the coarse
total is utilized.
3.6. FINE AGGREGATE
Fine total utilized as a part of this examination is stream sand. The span of Fine totals utilized is under 4.75mm9,
10 and the physical properties of materials are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Physical properties of materials.
S.NO. SPECIFIC GRAVITY DENSITY (Kg/m3
) VALUE
1 FLY ASH 1025.7 2.43
2 GGBS 2068.50 2.61
3 FINE AGGREGATE 1588 2.60
4 COARSE AGGREGATE 1602 2.90
4. METHODOLOGY
4.1. PREPARATION OF ALKALINE SOLUTION
The qualities of Geopolymer cement is inspected for blends of 8 Molarity of NaOH. The atomic weight of NaOH
is 40. To get ready 8 Molarity of arrangement, 320gm of sodium hydroxide chips are weighed and are broken
up in refined water to frame 1-liter arrangement. NaOH chips are added gradually to refined water to get ready
1liter arrangement. In the same manner, for 10 molarity 400gm of NaOH flakes are weighed and dissolved in 1
liter distilled water.
4.2. MIX PROPORTION
The geopolymer cement is composed according to the aggregate volume involved by fine and coarse totals
which are embraced as 70%. The water substance to fly fiery11 remains and GGBS proportion is taken as 0.45.
The proportion of NaOH to Na2SiO3 is taken as 1:2 of molarity 8 & 10. The routine technique utilized as a part
of making of typical cement is received to set up the geopolymer concrete.
4.3. CASTING AND CURING
At first, the fine total, coarse total, fly cinder and GGBS are blended in dry condition and after that the soluble
arrangement which is a mixture of Na2SiO3and NaOH arrangements are added to the dry blend, water is added
to the cementitious material (fly fiery remains and GGBS). The blending is accomplished for around 6-8 minutes
for the best possible holding of the considerable number of materials. In the wake of blending is done, the
examples are thrown by giving appropriate compaction12,13 in three layers. For the curing, 3D shapes are
deformed following 1 day of throwing and they are set in encompassing room temperature for 7 and 28 days.
Casting and curing of cones are represented in Figure 2.

5. V. Keerthy and Y. Himath Kumar
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 606 editor@iaeme.com
Figure 2. Casting and curing of specimens
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1. TESTING
The examples were tried according to IS 516:1959 and the qualities were ascertained for 7 and 28 days.
5.2. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
The examples (solid shapes) of dimension 150 mm x 150 mm x 150 mm be set up for every blend. Following
24 hours the examples were de-shaped and cured for 7& 28 days. The compressive quality reported is the normal
of three results got from three indistinguishable 3D shapes. For 7 and 28 days and the outcomes were tabled and
represented beneath Table 4-5.
Table 4. Compressive strength for different ages of geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/mm2
) 7
DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 31.24 50.8
M2 75 25 28.04 31.24
M3 50 50 18.74 22.06
M4 25 75 7.41 7.69
Table 5. Compressive strength for different ages of geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
(N/mm2
) 28 DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 39.04 53.03
M2 75 25 28.92 31.82
M3 50 50 26.3 29.02
M4 25 75 9.28 10.46

6. Experimental Studies On Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with GGBS and Fly Ash
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 607 editor@iaeme.com
5.3. SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH
Barrels of an example of the dimension 150 mm x 150 mm x 300 mm be set up for every blend. Following 24
hours the examples were deformed and cured for 7& 28 days. The split elasticity reported is the normal of three
results got from three indistinguishable chambers. For 7 and 28 days and the outcomes were tabled and
represented beneath Table 6,7.
Table 6. Split tensile strength of different ages for geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH
(Mpa) 7 DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 3.23 1.48
M2 75 25 2.24 1.16
M3 50 50 0.55 0.969
M4 25 75 0.27 0.555
Table 7. Split tensile strength of different ages for geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH
(Mpa) 28 DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 2.7 1.32
M2 75 25 1.33 1.29
M3 50 50 0.58 1.11
M4 25 75 0.27 0.69
5.4. FLEXURAL STRENGTH
The bar (examples) of dimension 100mm × 100mm × 500 mm were utilized and are set up for every blend.
Following 24 hours the examples were deformed and cured for 7& 28 days. The flexural quality reported is the
normal of three results acquired from three indistinguishable hats. For 7 and 28 days and the outcomes were
tabled and represented beneath Table 8-9.
Table 8. Flexural strength for different ages of geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
FLEXURAL STRENGTH (Mpa)
7 DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 4.01 3.33
M2 75 25 2.74 2.25
M3 50 50 1.56 1.85
M4 25 75 0.215 0.471

7. V. Keerthy and Y. Himath Kumar
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 608 editor@iaeme.com
Table 9. Flexural strength for different ages of geo polymer concrete.
MIX ID GGBS
(%)
FLY ASH
(%)
FLEXURAL STRENGTH (Mpa)
28 DAYS
8M 10M
M1 100 0 0.588 4.76
M2 75 25 0.585 2.44
M3 50 50 0.583 1.96
M4 25 75 0.21 0.583
6. CONCLUSION
• The Compressive strength test which is done at the age of 7 days the percentage variation between 8m and 10m
are 38.5%, 10.24%, 15.04%, 3.65%. and for 28 days are 26.38% , 9.11%, 9.3% ,11.28%
• The split tensile strength test which is done at the age of 7 days the percentage variation between 8m and 10m are
54.17%, 48.21%, 43.24%, 50.9% for 28 days are 51.11% , 30.%, 47.74% ,60.86% .
• The flexural strength test which is done at the age of 7 days the percentage variation between 8m and 10m are
16.95%, 17.88%, 15.67%, 54.35% for 28 days are 87.64% , 76.02%, 70.25% ,64%.
REFERENCES
[1] Rajini B, NarasimhaRao A V. Mechanical properties of geopolymer concrete with fly ash and GGBS as source
materials. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering, and Technology. 2014
September; 3(4), 15944-53.
[2] Debra R A B, Felix Kala T. Experimental Investigation of Self Healing Behavior of Concrete using Silica
Fume and GGBFS as Mineral Admixtures. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 December; 8(36),
1-5.
[3] Hardjito D, Wallah S E, Rangan B V. Study on engineering properties of fly ash-based geo polymer concrete.
Journal of the Australasian Ceramic Society. 2002; 38(1), 44-47.
[4] Palaniappan A, Vasantha S, Prakasan S S, Prabhu S. GGBS as alternative to OPC in concrete as an
environment pollution reduction approach. International journal of engineering research and technology. 2013
June; 2(6), 190-195.
[5] Naidu P G, Prasad A S S N, Adiseshu S, Satyanarayana P V V. A study on strength properties of geo polymer
concrete with addition of GGBS. International Journal of Engineering Research and Development. 2012 July;
2(4), 19-28.
[6] Davidovits J. Geo polymers: Inorganic Polymeric New Materials. Journal of Thermal Analysis 1991; 37,
1633-1656.
[7] Davidovits J. Global Warming Impact on the Cement and Aggregate Industries”, World Resource review.
1994; 6(2), 263-78.
[8] Provis J, Duxson P, Harrex R M, Yong C Z, Van Deventer J S J. Valorisation of fly ashes by geo
polymerization. Global NEST journal. 2009; 11(2), 147-54.
[9] Dattatreya K, Rajamane N P, Sabitha D, Ambily P S, Nataraja M C. Flexural behavior of reinforced geo
polymer concrete beams. International journal of civil and structural engineering. 2011 Noverber; 2(1), 138-
59.
[10] Muthadhi A, Vanjinathan J, Durai D. Experimental Investigations on Geo Polymer Concrete based on Class
C Fly Ash. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 February; 9(5), 1-5.

8. Experimental Studies On Properties of Geopolymer Concrete with GGBS and Fly Ash
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 609 editor@iaeme.com
[11] Vignesh P, Vivek K. An experimental investigation on strength parameters of fly ash based geo polymer
concrete with GGBS. 2015 May; 2(2), 1-8.
[12] Sanni S H, Khadiranaikar R. Performance of geopolymer concrete under severe environmental conditions.
2012; 3(2), 396-407.
[13] Bibha Kumari and Vikas Srivastava, Effect of Waste Plastic and Fly Ash on Mechanical Properties of Rigid
Pavement. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(5), 2016, pp.247–256.
[14] Dr. P. Sakthiselvan, Mrinimoy Jyoti Borah and Swathi. For Road Construction Using Examination of Fly Ash
Cement. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 6(10), 2015, pp. 126-131.
[15] A.Iftiqar Ahmed and Dr.S.Siddiraju, Strength Properties on Fly Ash Based Geo Polymer Concrete with
Admixtures International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(3), 2016, pp.352–358.
[16] Radhakrishna V K. Structural Behavior of Geopolymer Masonry. Indian Journal of Science and Technology.
2016 Jul; 9(15), 1-5.
[17] V. Nagendra, C. Sashidhar, S. M. Prasanna Kumar and N. Venkata Ramana GGBS and Nano Silica (NS)
Effect on Concrete. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(5), 2016, pp.477 – 484.