Cara Menggugurkan Sperma Yang Masuk Rahim Biyar Tidak Hamil
Experimental study on strength aspects of redmud and incinerator waste based
1. DAYANANDA SAGAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
An Autonomous Institution affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi, Shavige Malleswara Hills, Kumara swamy
layout Bangalore – 560078
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
“EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH ASPECT OF
RED MUD AND INCINERATOR WASTE BASED
GEOPOLYMER MORTAR”
Presented by:
PRIYANKA H J
IV SEM, MTech
1DS21CSE14
Under the Guidance of:
Dr. NEETHU URS
Professor
DSCE, Bangalore
FINAL VIVA - 2023
1
2. CONTENTS
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Objectives
• Methodology
• Basic material testing
• EDAX analysis of RM and IW
• Mix procedure
• Mix design
• Test results and comparison
• SEM and EDAX analysis of geopolymer mix
• Conclusion
• Scope for future work
• References
2
3. ABSTRACT
• The most important and widely used material in construction is concrete and its major component is cement, basically known as Ordinary
Portland cement (OPC). Since, OPC is well known for its high emission of CO2 gas.
• When looking for alternatives that need less energy or raw materials other than limestone will help minimize CO2 emissions from an
environmental standpoint. Geopolymers are promising alternative materials for Portland cement.
• Geopolymer are amorphous three-dimensional Alumina-Silicate binder material, which is produced by copolymerization of aluminosilicate
materials with alkaline solutions, exhibits higher mechanical strength and excellent durability properties.
• Several aluminosilicate industrial wastes such as fly ash, Metakaolin, red mud etc. can be used as source materials for geopolymer concrete
production. These wastes are used as source materials to produce geopolymer as it contains high silica and alumina content.
• In the present experimental study, Red Mud, incinerator waste and Micro silica as binder need to be added alkaline activator in the form of
sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH). Molarity variation of NaOH is taken as 6, 8, 10 M.
• Mortar proportion with 30% red mud and 60% incinerator waste exhibited maximum strength. Highest strength obtained for geopolymer
mortar was 2.36 MPa with 30% red mud and 60% incinerator waste and 10M molarity.
3
4. INTRODUCTION
• Concrete is the most predominantly used construction material. The basic ingredient of concrete is
cement, the mass production of cement increases carbon footprints and thus becomes a major
contributor for global warming.
• One promising option to lessen the environmental impact of conventional cement-based materials
is Geopolymers.
• Geopolymers are alumina-silicate bonds which are sustainable, inorganic materials used in
construction that can replace traditional cement and concrete, offering environmental friendly
alternatives with strong, durable properties.
• Since, cement contains alumina, silica and other elements. Here in this study, Incinerator waste
and Red mud that is produced by industries containing alumina and silica which goes as landfill is
used as an replacement for cement.
• Physical and chemical properties of red mud and incinerator waste are investigated.
Microstructural analysis are studied and a comparative explanation between strength parameters of
two the samples are presented.
4
5. LITERATURE REVIEW
TITLE YEAR PUBLISHER AUTHOR INFERENCE
Effect of Molarity on Compressive
Strength of
Geopolymer Mortar
2014 IJCER C.D. Budh
and N.R. Warhade
Tests was carried out on 70.6x70.6x70.6mm Geopolymer mortar specimen.
The ratio of alkaline liquid to fly ash is taken as 0.5. The obtained compressive
strength was validated by NDT results. Compressive strength increases with
increase in molarity. Also, velocity increases with increase in molarity.
Characterization of Red Mud as a
Subgrade Construction Material
2015 - Sarat Kumar Dasa ,
Subrat Kumar Routb ,
Shamshad Alam
Basic properties like specific gravity, particle size distribution, Atterberg’s
limits, OMC and MDD are determined. Engineering property like shear
strength are determined. The model footing test was performed to check
sustainability of red mud as pavement subgrade material. FE analysis was
performed and results were compared with the laboratory results.
Effect of curing methods of red mud
based geopolymer mortar
2017 IAEME Smita Singh, Dr. M. U.
Aswath, Dr. R.V.
Ranganath
Compressive strength, tensile strength and modulus of elasticity thermally
cured and ambient cured specimens were discussed. Strength of thermally
cured mortar improved with molarity whereas ambient cured mortar possessed
better strength at lower molarity. Tensile strength followed similar pattern as
compressive strength. Ambient cured mortars were found to be stiffer than the
thermally cured ones.
Effect of Alkaline Solution with Varying
Mix Proportion on Geopolymer Mortar
2017 IOP Ananthkumar M,
Raghavapriya S
Specimens of different NaOH solution (10M, 12M and 15M) for different mix
proportion (1:1, 1:2 and 1:3) and 60°C-80° C curing temperature were cast.
The densities, compressive strength, alkalinity, co-efficient of absorption were
determined.High curing temperatures produces higher strength. Mixes with
12M showed higher compressive strength than the rest proportions.
Effect of Mix Parameters on Strength of
Geopolymer Mortars
Experimental Study
2018 - A. Naghizadeh and S.O.
Ekolu
1.0- 3.0 (SS to SH) alkaline activator ratios were used with SS modulus= 2.5
and NaOH as 10-14M. Mortars of 2.25 A/B ratio were used to prepare 50 mm
cubes with L/S ratio from 0.3-0.6. All specimens showed significant influence
on compressive strength development. But, the optimum strength was at
SS/SH= 2.0 , 12M and L/S=0.5.
5
6. LITERATURE REVIEW
TITLE YEAR PUBLISHER AUTHOR INFERENCE
Preparation of red mud-based
geopolymer materials from
MSWI fly ash and red mud by
mechanical activation
2018 Elsevier Yuancheng Li, Xiaobo
Min, Yong Ke, Degang
Liu, Chongjian Tang,
Municipal solid waste incineration fly ash (MSWIFA) and red mud were utilized to
prepare red mud-based geopolymer materials (RGM). The hydration characteristics
long-term stability and physical properties of RGM were tested. Results showed
that mechanical activation can not only effectively activate red mud, but also
effectively improve the reaction of MSWIFA and red mud. When 14% sodium
silicate was added to the binder, the UCS reached 12.75 MPa at 28 days.
Performance of geopolymer
mortar cured under ambient
temperature
2019 Elsevier Mohamed G. Khalil,
Fareed Elgabbas ,
Mohamed S. El-Feky ,
Hany El-Shafie
The base material (GGBS and MK), water/binder ratio (0.0, and 15.0%), and
modulus of silicate (1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7) were considered. Fresh and hardened
properties were examined. It was observed that by increasing the modulus of
silicate, the workability increased and the compressive strength decreased. 1.7
modulus of silicate is the optimum mixture and compressive strength of the
optimum mixture after 7, 28 and 90 days of water curing were 19.6, 33.4 and 35.6
Mpa and its flowability was about 150%.
Fresh and Hardened Properties
of Fly Ash– Slag Blended
Geopolymer Paste and Mortar
2019 IJCSM Subhashree
Samantasinghr and
Suresh Prasad Singh
fresh and hardened properties of fly ash and slag blended mortar are investigated
and results are determined. Additionally, bonding and microstructural changes are
examined. The fresh properties of geopolymers were found within the prescribed
range of OPC. compressive strength of mortar specimens increases with an
increase of slag content in the mix
Compressive strength of mortar
with alkali activated fly ash and
GGBS
2020 IOP Sagarika panda,
Ramakantha panigrahi
Fly ash and GGBS as binder materials, specimens were prepared for compressive
strength check. Compressive strength achieved from temperature cured is higher
than ambient cured samples. GGBS content was directly proportional to the
compressive strength of mortar specimen.
Properties of red-mud-based
geopolymers in the light of
their
chemical composition
2024 IOP Ali Abdulhasan Khalaf,
Katalin Kopecskó
Statistical analysis has been performed on the major oxides of red mud to
understand the relationship between chemical composition and properties (e.g.,
workability, setting time, compressive strength, etc.) of red mud-based geopolymer
composite. With the results, it is concluded that red mud can be a suitable binder
by blending with other geopolymer source materials to achieve the desired fresh
and mechanical properties.
6
7. OBJECTIVES
• To find the optimum percentage of red mud & incinerator waste for preparation of geopolymer
mortar.
• To study the strength characteristics of red mud and incinerator waste based geopolymer mortar.
• To study the surface morphology of Geopolymer mix (red mud and incinerator waste mix) from
SEM analysis.
7
9. METHODOLOGY- DESCRIPTION
Exhaustive literature survey was carried out regarding various topics of project like geopolymer, incinerator wastes (fly ash, red mud), mix
design various standard testing methods etc.
OPC 53 grade cement and sand were collected and utilized.
Various tests on materials (Cement, fine aggregate, incinerator waste, red mud) was conducted.
Based on test result of materials, cement mortar mix was done in accordance to IS 4031:1988.
XRD Analysis/EDAX analysis was done for red mud and incinerator waste samples to find the aluminum and silica content in it.
To prepare alkaline solution, NaOH pellets were made to dissolve in distilled water based on required molarity and then mixed with
required amount of sodium silicate solution 24 hours prior to the preparation of geopolymer mortar. (1M = 40gm of NaOH pellets)
Preparing geopolymer mortar by varying percentage of red mud and incinerator waste and Mix proportion trial for product of mortar was
done.
Based on mix design cubes were casted and strength tests was conducted on 7, 14, 28 days for the same. Based on the results, conclusions
are drawn control mix and these results will be compared with geopolymer mortar cube.
SEM analysis was done post testing of geopolymer mortar cubes and Project report will be prepared in detail. 9
10. BASIC TESTING- CEMENT
Sl no. Tests conducted Results Requirements as per IS 12269-2013
1 Specific gravity 2.93 2.9-3.15
2 Normal consistency 28% ----
3 Initial setting time 35 min >30 min
4 final setting time 160 min 600 min
5 fineness 7.5% ----
10
Specific gravity Normal consistency Fineness Mould post NC test
11. BASIC TESTING- M SAND
Sl no. Tests conducted Results
1 Fineness modulus 3.14
2 Specific gravity 2.5
3 Bulking of sand 6%
4 Bulk density 1650 kg/m3
5 Water absorption 0.80%
11
Fineness modulus Specific gravity Bulking of sand Bulk density
Code book: IS 2386- 1963 part3
12. FINENESS MODULUS OF M SAND
Sl. No.
IS Sieve
Size
Weight
Retained
(gm)
Percentage
of weight
retained
Cumulative
percentage
retained
Percentage of
fine aggregate
passing
1 4.75 mm 38 3.8 3.8 96.2
2 2.36 mm 161 16.1 19.9 80.1
3 1.18 mm 235 23.5 43.4 56.6
4 600 187 18.7 62.1 37.9
5 300 245 24.5 86.6 13.4
6 150 120 12 98.6 1.4
7 pan 11 1.1 99.7 0.3
RESULTS
%gravel 3.8 D60 mm 1.3507234 Cu=D60/D10 5.245527784
% sand 98.6 D30 mm 0.50326531 Cc=D30*2/D60*D10 0.191883573
%fine 0.98 D10 mm 0.2575
D60 0.1 60 1.35072 0
1.3507234 60 1.35072 60
D30 0.1 30 0.50327 0
0.50326531 30 0.50327 30
D10 0.1 10 0.2575 0
Fineness modulus of fine aggregate= 314.4/100 = 3.144
12
Fine sand 2.2-2.6
Medium sand 2.6-2.9
Coarse sand 2.9-3.2
Code book: IS 383-1970
13. BULKING OF SAND
Bulking of sand =
𝐻2 −𝐻1
𝐻1
𝑥 100
Volume of sand taken= 300ml
% of water added each time = 2% =2% of 300 = 6ml
13
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
%
of
bulking
of
sand
% of water added
Bulking of sand
% of water added Initial Height H1 Final height H2 % of bulking
0
300
300 0.00
2 350 16.67
4 390 30.00
6 430 43.33
8 400 33.33
10 320 6.67
Code book: IS 2386- 1963 Part 3
14. BASIC TESTING- RED MUD
14
Sl no. Tests conducted Results Code Books Referred Requirements
1 Specific gravity 2.5 IS 2720-1985-part 3 2.8-3.3
2 Plastic limit 28% IS 2720-1985-part 5 -------
3 Liquid limit 40.90% IS 2720-1985-part 5 ------
4 shrinkage limit 11% IS 2720-1985-part 5 -------
5 Sieve analysis IS 2720-1985-part 4 ------
Specific gravity Casagrande apparatus Plastic limit Liquid limit Shrinkage limit
SAMPLES
16. PLASTIC LIMIT OF RED MUD
16
Trial number 1 2 3
Weight of container(g) 11.05 11.38 11.42
Wet mass+ container(g) 12.93 14.06 13.98
Dry mass+ container(g) 12.515 13.447 13.405
Weight of Water(g) 0.415 0.613 0.575
Weight of dry soil(g) 1.465 2.067 1.985
Moisture content(%) 28.327645 29.65651 28.96725
PLASTIC LIMIT 28.983802
PLASTICITY INDEX 11.958276
<0 Non plastic
<7
slighty
plastic
7 TO 17
medium
plastic
>17
highly
plastic
11.95- medium plastic
17. LIQUID LIMIT OF RED MUD
No. of blows 13 20 28
Weight of container 5.42 4.91 5.82
Wet mass+ container 12.23 15.12 16.51
Dry mass+ container 10.225 12.133 13.418
Weight of water 2.005 2.987 3.092
Weight of dry soil 4.805 7.223 7.598
Moisture content 41.727367 41.35401 40.69492
17
Liquid limit 40.94208
18. SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF INCINERATOR WASTE
Table 4. 1 Specific gravity of Incineration waste
Sl.no Details Weight of
Sample(gms)
1 Weight of empty bottle (w1) 26
2 Weight of bottle + water (w2) 76
3 Weight of bottle + kerosene (w3) 66
4 Weight of bottle + IW + kerosene (w4) 82
5 Weight of IW (w5) 30
Specific gravity of Incineration waste =
𝑤5(𝑤3−𝑤1)
𝑤5+𝑤3−𝑤1 (𝑤2−𝑤1)
=
30(66−26)
(30+66−26)(76−26)
= 1.7
18
19. EDAX- RED MUD
Element Weight % Atomic %
Na 2O 7.15 14.32
Al 2O3 16.52 20.11
Si O2 3.03 6.25
Ca O 0.54 1.19
Ti O2 2.02 3.14
Fe 2O3 70.75 54.99
19
20. Element Weight % Atomic %
Na 2O 5.73 5.81
Mg O 4.98 7.77
Al 2O3 10.91 6.73
Si O2 8.83 9.25
P 2O5 2.30 1.02
S O3 1.50 1.18
K 2O 4.44 2.97
Ca O 53.57 60.12
Ti O2 5.33 4.20
Fe 2O3 2.43 0.96
EDAX-INCINERATOR WASTE
20
21. Chemical composition of PC, Red mud and incinerator waste
Before casting of cubes, incinerator waste was mixed with micro silica
using a alkaline activator to check if CaO (Calcium oxide) or carbon is
active in IW or not.
21
Components Na20 Al203 SiO2 CaO TiO2 Fe2O3 MgO P2O5 SO3 K2O N20
Portland Cement - 5.6 21.28 64.64 - 3.36 2.06 - 2.14 - 0.05
Red Mud 7.15 16.52 3.03 0.54 2.02 70.75 - - - - -
Incinerator waste 5.73 10.91 8.83 53.57 5.33 2.43 4.98 2.3 1.5 4.44 -
22. MIX PROCEDURE
22
DRY MIX OF
MATERIALS
ADDING AMOUNT OF
WATER ACCORDING
TO THE NORMAL
CONSISTENCY
CASTING OF
SPECIMENS
DEMOULDING AND
CURING
TESTING OF
SPECIMENS
DRY MIX OF
MATERIALS
ADDING PREPARED
ALKALINE
ACTIVATOR
CASTING OF CM
AND GM
SPECIMENS
DEMOULDING AND
CURING
TESTING OF
SPECIMENS
Cement mortar Geopolymer mortar
23. MIX DESIGN FOR CEMENT MORTAR
Unit weight of cement mortar= 2080 kg/m3
Cube size = 70.6x70.6x70.6 mm conforming to IS 10080:1982
Volume = 0.000352m3
Amount of Cement mortar required
2080x0.000352
=0.732 kg
For mortar ratio 1:3,
Cement = 200x9 =1.8kgs
Sand = 600x9 = 5.4kgs (confirming to IS 10080:1982)
Water = (P/4+3) Percentage of combined mass of cement and sand
Where P is normal consistency of cement
Water = (28/4+3) x1/100x1/100
= 80 grams (1 gm = 1ml) = 80 ml
Water = 80x9 = 720 ml
23
25. Quantity of
materials required
for 3 cubes
Days
No.
of
cubes
CTM
reading
Compressive
strength
Average
Compressive
Strength
N/mm2
Cement= 200x3
=600 gms
7th
1 3100 6.10
M sand= 600x3
=1.8 kgs 2 2900 5.71 6.04
Water= 80X3=240ml 3 3200 6.30
Quantity of
materials required
for 3 cubes
Days
No.
of
cubes
CTM
reading
Compressive
strength
Average
Compressive
Strength
N/mm2
Cement= 200x3
=600 gms
14th
4 4200 8.27
M sand= 600x3
=1.8 kgs 5 4400 8.66 8.27
Water= 80X3=240ml 6 4000 7.87
Quantity of
materials required
for 3 cubes
Days
No.
of
cubes
CTM
reading
Compressive
strength
Average
Compressive
Strength
N/mm2
Cement= 200x3
=600 gms
28th
7 5300 10.43
M sand= 600x3
=1.8 kgs 8 5100 10.04 10.37
Water= 80x3=240ml 9 5400 10.63 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
7 14 28
Compressive
strength(N/mm
2
)
Curing period(days)
Compressive strength of Cement mortar cubes
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CEMENT MORTAR CUBES- 7, 14 AND 28 DAYS
25
26. MIX DESIGN FOR GEOPOLYMER MORTAR
To prepare NaOH solution, below required amount of pellets were mixed in 1 liter of distilled water for all the
proportions
• 1M = 40gm of NaOH pellets
• 6M= 240gm of NaOH pellets
• 8M= 320gm of NaOH pellets
• 10M= 400gm of NaOH pellets
To prepare Sodium silicate solution, 1M (21.2 gm) of sodium silicate was mixed in already prepared 100ml of
6M, 8M and 10M solution separately to obtain alkaline activator. The solution is done 24 hours prior to the
casting.
• Cube size = 70.6x70.6x70.6 mm conforming to IS 10080:1982
26
27. • Binder proportion- 10:80:10 (red mud: incinerator waste: micro silica)
Mortar proportion: 1:3(binder proportion: M sand)
10% of 200= 20gm of RM
80% of 200= 160gm of IW
10% of 200= 20gm of MS
M sand = 600 gm confirming to IS 10080:1982
• Binder proportion- 30:60:10 (red mud: incinerator waste: micro silica)
Mortar proportion: 1:3(binder proportion: M sand)
30% of 200= 60gm of RM
60% of 200= 120gm of IW
10% of 200= 20gm of MS
M sand = 600 gm confirming to IS 10080:1982
• Binder proportion- 20:70:10 (red mud: incinerator waste: micro silica)
Mortar proportion: 1:3(binder proportion: M sand)
20% of 200= 40gm of RM
70% of 200= 140gm of IW
10% of 200= 20gm of MS
M sand = 600 gm confirming to IS 10080:1982
27
32. 32
Compressive strength of Cement Mortar, RM10, RM20 and RM30
Variation of compressive strength with Red mud percentage
Variation of compressive strength with molarity for RM10, RM20 and RM30
33. EDAX Analysis of Geopolymer mix (RM and IW mix)
Element
Weight
%
Atomic
%
Na 2O 23.95 25.50
Mg O 0.73 1.19
Al 2O3 7.91 5.12
Si O2 31.83 34.97
S O3 1.41 1.17
Cl 2O 7.11 5.40
K 2O 1.21 0.85
Ca O 19.79 23.29
Fe 2O3 6.06 2.51
33
36. CONCLUSION
The EDAX patterns of red mud consists of elements like Na2O(10.41%), MgO(1.66%), Al2O3(26.74%), SiO2(8.10%), K2O(0.29%),
CaO(1.32%), TiO2(4.42%) and Fe2O3(47.06%). On observation, Aluminum content was sufficient and less hazardous.
The EDAX patterns of incinerator waste consists Na2O (1.75%), MgO(2.90%), Al2O3(0.85%), SiO2(2.19%), K2O(3.19%), CaO(82.91%),
TiO2(1.56%), P2O5(1.86%), SO3(1.05%), Fe2O3(1.04%). On observation, Micro silica was added to improve silica content.
• On trying different molarities on different proportions, the optimum molarity is found to be 10M for all three percentages of red mud
variation of mortar composition 1:3 binder to fine aggregate ratio.
• Out of three Mortar proportions, Mortar proportion with 30:60:10 (Red mud: incinerator waste: micro silica) i.e., 30% Red mud and 60%
incinerator waste exhibited the maximum strength.
• Compressive strength of geopolymer mortar samples increases with increase in red mud percentages.
36
37. SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK
• Red mud and silica based geopolymer blocks can be tested for durability.
• Other waste with presence of silica can be tried with red mud.
• Also, the incineration waste can be tried in combination with other waste containing alumina.
• Can be tried for 12 Molarity and above variations.
• Can be tried for concrete as well.
37
38. REFERENCES
[1]. A. Naghizadeh, S.O Ekolu, “Effect of Mix Parameters on Strength of Geopolymers Experimental study,” Sixth International Conference on
Durability of Concrete Structures, July 2018.
[2]. C.D. Budh and N.R Warhade, “Effect of Molarity on Compressive Strength of Geopolymer Mortar,” IJCER, ISSN 2278-3652 Volume 5,
Number 1 (2014).
[3]. Sara banu. J, Dr.Kumutha. R, Dr.Vijai. K, “A Review on Durability Studies of Geopolymer Concrete and Mortar under Aggressive
Environment,” SSRG – IJCE – Volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
[4]. Karuppuchamy k, Ananth Kumar M, “Effect of Alkaline Solution with Varying Mix Proportion on Geopolymer Mortar,” IOP Conf. Series:
Materials Science and Engineering, 2018.
[5]. MohamedG. Khalil, Fareed Elgabbas, Mohamed.El-Feky, Hany El-Shafie, “Performance of geopolymer mortar cured under ambient
temperature,” Elsevier, Aug. 2019.
[6]. Sagarika panda, Ramakantha Panigrahi, “Compressive strength of Mortar with Alkali Activated fly ash and Ground Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag,” IOP Conference Series: Material Science Engineering, Dec. 2020.
[7]. Sarat Kumar Dasa, Subrat Kumar Routb, Shamshad Alamc, “Characterization of Red Mud as a Subgrade Construction Material,”
Conference paper, Dec. 2015.
[8]. Subhashree Samantasinghar and Suresh Prasad Singh, “Fresh and Hardened Properties of Fly Ash– Slag Blended Geopolymer Paste and
Mortar,” IJCSM, 2019.
[9]. Smitha Singh, Dr. M. U. Aswath, Dr. R.V. Ranganath, “Effect of curing methods on red mud based geopolymer mortar,” International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 8, Issue 10, October 2017
[10]. Davinder Singh, Arvind Kumar, “Performance Evaluation and Geo-Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Ash Material
Amended with Cement and Fiber”, Department of civil engineering, 10 May 2017.
[11]. IS 4031 (Part 6): 1988, “Methods of physical tests for hydraulic cement: Part 6 Determination of compressive strength of hydraulic
cement”.
38
