STUDY OF THE PROPERTIES OF METAKIOLIN AND GGBS BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 565 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2017, pp. 565–574, Article ID: IJCIET_08_01_065
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
STUDY OF THE PROPERTIES OF METAKIOLIN
AND GGBS BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE
P. Malleswara Rao
M. Tech. Student, Department of Civil Engineering
K. L. University, Vaddeswaram, A.P, INDIA
K. Hamantha Raja
Asst. Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
K. L. University, Vaddeswaram, A. P, INDIA
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To investigate the properties of metakiolin and GGBS based geopolymer
concrete. Methods/Statistical Analysis: In this connection, Geopolymer is need of the hour,
where the binder is inorganic polymer. Geopolymer concrete will be introduced as an
alternative concrete which did not use any cement in its mixture and used Metakaolin and
GGBS as alternative cement. NaOH and Na2SiO3 were used as activator solution. Findings:
Geopolymer concrete is prepared by using the solution of sodium silicate mixed with sodium
hydroxide. The fixed ratio of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide is 2.5 and the concentration
of sodium hydroxide is 8M. The geo polymer concrete specimens are casted and tested for
compressive strength for and 28 days and cured at ambient temperature.
Applications/Improvements: This study helps in gaining knowledge about the morphological
composition of concrete which might result in path-breaking trends in construction industry.
Key words: Geopolymer Concrete, GGBS, Metakaolin, Alkaline Solution, Curing, Cylinder
Split Tensile Strength, Molarity.
Cite this Article: P. Malleswara Rao and K. Hamantha Raja, Study of The Properties of
Metakiolin and GGBS Based Geopolymer Concrete. International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 565–574.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1
1. INTRODUCTION
In construction industry, Concrete utilization is abundant in every nook and corner of the planet earth
after water. Ordinary Portland bond (OPC) is the natural choice for manufacturing of conventional
concrete. There is alarming amount of carbon dioxide, a dangerous green house gas, emissions which
degrade the environment. The need to diminish the overall anthropogenic carbon dioxide has
encouraged examiners to filter for sensible building materials. The technique of conveying cement
is astoundingly inside imperativeness genuine, and additionally accountable for broad releases of
CO2, GHC realizing an unnatural climate change. On this landscape, there is a sincere need to find a
substitute spread to bond with a particular deciding objective to make the advancement business
ecofriendly and sensible1-2
.

P. Malleswara Rao and K. Hamantha Raja
Remembering the finished objective to reduce the radiations of carbon dioxide, bond in concrete
is supplanted by materials like fly searing garbage, GGBS (Ground granulated effect warmer slag)
and metakaolin is considered as a more eco-pleasing other choice to Ordinary Portland Cement
(OPC) based concrete3-4
. It is termed as Geopolymer bond. Geopolymer materials address an
imaginative advancement that is delivering broad eagerness for the improvement business,
particularly in light of the advancing highlight on practicality. Instead of the Portland type, the green
concrete relies on upon insignificantly took care of basic materials or mechanical results to give the
coupling authorities. Since Portland cement is accountable for major essentialness and relatively
large amount of GHC credited to a customary arranged complex bond, the store assets of the potential
imperativeness and carbon dioxide utilizing Geopolymer can be broad. Along these lines, there is
creating excitement for Geopolymer application being developed industry5-9
. In India, the
Metakaolin and GGBS are the most prospering mechanical effects10-13
. These contain structural and
functional properties of new and set concrete that have been inspected. Hang and air substance of
new concrete and ingestion and compressive nature of set bond were furthermore explored. Test
results show that this Metakaolin and GGBS are fit for upgrading set strong execution up to 10%,
Enhancing new strong lead and can be used as a piece of compositional strong mixes. The
compressive quality and split versatility of concrete was measured for 3, 7 and 28 days. This paper
presents the testing methodology for green concrete along with durability tests.
2. MATERIALS USED
2.1. Metakaolin
Metakaolin is obtained from the Kaomine industries PVT LTD at Vadodara on Gujarat state. The
specific gravity of Metakaolin is 2.6 and the size of particle is less than 90 microns. The colour of
metakaolin is pink, shown in Refer Table 1-2. and Figure1.
Table 1 Physical Properties of Metakaolin
Specific Gravity 2.4 to 2.46
Physical Form Powder
Color Baby pink
Specific Surface 8-15 m2
/g
Table 2 Chemical Properties of Metakaolin
Sio2 51-53% CaO <0.20%
Al2O3 42-44% MgO <0.10%
Fe2O3 <2.20% Na2O <0.05%
Tio2 <3.0% K2O <0.40%
SO4 <0.5% L.O.I <0.50%
Figure 1 Metakaolin

Study of The Properties of Metakiolin and GGBS Based Geopolymer Concrete
3.2. GGBS
The specimen is from Jindal steel and power Ltd., Vijayawada office. The specific gravity of GGBS,
bulkdensity, fineness is 2.9.1200 kg/m3
,> 350m2
/kg respectively of the specimen, shown in Table 3.
and Figure 2.
Table 3 GGBS Chemical composition
Oxide GGBS
Cao 36.77
SiO2 30.97
Al2O3 17.41
MgO 9.01
SO3 1.82
Fe2O3 1.03
Na2O 0.69
K2O 0.46
Figure 2 GGBS
3.3. Coarse aggregate
Coarse aggregates of sizes 10mm and 20mm whose properties, shown in Table 4.
Table 4 Properties of Coarse aggregates
Sieve Size
(mm)
20 mm 12 mm
Requiremen
t as per IS:
383-1970
Percentage
passing
Requiremen
t as per
IS:383-1970
Percentage
passing
80.00 ---- ---- ---- ----
63.00 ---- ---- ---- ----
40.00 100 % 100 % ---- ----
20.00 85 – 100 % 96.52 % ---- ----
16.00 ---- ---- 100 % 100 %
12.50 ---- ---- 85 – 100 % 96.84 %
10.00 0 – 20 % 13.72 % 0 – 45 % 41.52 %
4.75 0 – 05 % 2.84 % 0 – 10 % 7 %
2.36 ---- ---- ---- ----
Specific gravity 2.80 - 2.78
Water Absorption % 0.35 - 0.50
Aggregate Impact Value 9.52 % - 9.52 %
Bulk Density (kg/m3
) 1680 - 1630
Flakiness 15 % - 12 %
Elongation 12 % - 9 %

3.4. Fine aggregate
Fine type of aggregate ought to comprise of common sand or squashed stone sand. The residue
substance ought not to surpass 4%, shown in Table 5. and Figure 3.
Table 5 Property of Fine Aggregate
Sieve No.
Cumulative Percent
passing (%)
IS: 383-1970 – Zone II
requirement
Fine Aggregate
10 (mm) 100 100
4.75 (mm) 98.5 90-100
2.36 (mm) 95.3 75-100
1.18 (mm) 70.8 55-90
600 (µm) 46.5 35-59
300 (µm) 17.6 8-30
150 (µm) 3.21 0-10
Fineness modulus 3.12
Specific Gravity 2.78
Bulk Density 1375 Kg/m³
Figure 3 Coarse aggregate
3.6. Sodium hydroxide
Sodium hydroxide, otherwise called lye and soda, is an inorganic compound. It is one of common
activator as well as functions as antacid and helps in the process of geopolymerisation, shown in
Figure 4-5.
Figure 4. Sodium Hydroxide Figure 5. Structure of NAOH

4. METHODOLOGIES
4.1. Preparation of Alkaline Solutions
Here 8 Molar NaOH is considered in this paper. According to the standard chemical calculations,
320g of disintegrated sodiumhydroxide pieces and put in refined water to shape one liter
arrangement, shown in Table 6-8. and Figure 6.
Table 6 Chemical Properties NaOH
Chemical formula NaOH
Molar mass 39.9971 g mol−1
Appearance
White, waxy, opaque
crystals
Odor Odorless
Density 2.13 g/cm3
Melting point 318 °C (604 °F; 591 K)
Boiling point
1,388 °C (2,530 °F;
1,661 K)
Solubility in water
418 g/L (0 °C)
1110 g/L (20 °C)
3370 g/L (100 °C)
Solubility
soluble in glycerol
negligible in ammonia
insoluble in ether
Solubility in
methanol
238 g/L
Solubility in ethanol <<139 g/L
Vapor pressure <2.4 kPa (at 20 °C)
Basicity (pKb) 0.2
Refractive index(nD) 1.3576
Table 7 Weights of NaOH
Required Molarity Weight in grams of Sodium Hydroxide
8M 320
Table 8 Mixing Proportions of Geo-Polymer Concrete
Mix Ingredients
(Kg/m3)
values
Pazzolionic material 413
Coarse aggregate 20mm 699.3
Coarse aggregate 10mm 466.4
Fine aggregate 660
NAOH 53
NA2SIO3 133
P.M to Alkaline activator ratio 0.45

Figure 6 Alkaline solutions NAOH
4.2. Curing Method
4.2.1. Ambient curing
The process of curing involves in protection of the material from damage within temperature limit.
The consequence of this procedure is expanded quality and diminished piousness, shown in Figure
7.
Figure 7 ambient curing
4.2.2. Mixing of the materials
After the mixing Cubes (150mmX150mmX150mm) undergo the process of casting and compacted
properly. In this paper, ambient curing is chosen for curing of geopolymer concrete. For the sun light
curing, the cubes are un-molded after 24 hours and they are placed in the direct sunlight for 28 days.
Later cubes are immersed in solution where for every 100 gm, 95gm water and 5gm sodium sulphate
powder is added to prepare a solution. Before that weigh the cubes in dry condition and allow them
to immerse and cure for 15 days. After curing cubes are removed and rub the outer surface with dry
cloth and allow to ambient cure for 3 days. Now again weigh the cubes and check the variation in
%. Make a compressive test and note the results to compare the suitable proportion, shown in Table
9.

Table 9 Mixing Proportion of Geopolymer concrete
Ingredients in (kg/m³)
Different mixes
C1 C3 C6
P.M 414 414 414
Metakaolin 207 290 414
GGBS 207 124 0
C.A
10 Mm 467 467 467
20 Mm 699 699 699
F.A 660 660 660
Sodium Hydroxide Solution 53 53 53
Sodium Silicate Solution 133 133 133
4.2.3. Pazzolionic material proportions
The Pazzolionic material proportions are detailed in Table 10.
Table10 Pozzolanic Material Proportions
Mix ID Metakaolin GGBS
M1 50% 50%
M3 30% 70%
M6 0% 100%
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
5.1. Compressive strength
The compressive strength of concrete with different proportions are casted of age 3, 7 and 28 days
and a graph is plotted between pozzolanic material proportion(x-axis) Vs compressive strength (y-
axis).From the figure ,as the age of concrete increases compressive strength increases. 50% Mk +
50% GGBS gives compressive strength of 52.02 N/mm² which is the maximum strength obtained
than other proportions. The strength variation between one proportion to other and one age to other
is in vast manner.
A conclusion can be drawn that strength varies in direct proportion to GGBS. The result shows
that the strength is maximum for optimum mix value of 9:1 (GGBS: Metakaolin), shown in Table
11.
Table 11 Compressive strength of concrete for M30 control mix for 3,7,28 days
MIX PROPORTION
3 days
N/mm2
7 days
N/mm2
28 days
N/mm2
50%MK+50%GGBS 24.706 35.332 37.084
40%MK+60%GGBS 27.613 36.042 39.52
30%MK+70%GGBS 28.921 38.658 42.728
20%MK+80%GGBS 29.06 39.166 44.63
10%MK+90%GGBS 31.537 41.112 48.25
0%MK+100%GGBS 35.332 44.036 52.02

5.2. Split tensile strength
Cylinders of specimen are utilized for testing For 28 days; the tensile strength varies in direct relation
with GGBS proportion in the mixture. Split tensile strength shows improved strength of MPa for
10% replacement of metakaolin. (T = 2P/ π LD)
The tensile strength of specimen with different proportions are evaluated of age 3, 7 and 28 and
a graph is plotted between pozzolanic material proportion (x-axis) vs split tensile strength (y-axis).
From the figure, tensile strength increases with age. 100% GGBS gives strength of 5.69 N/mm²
which is the maximum strength obtained than other proportions. The strength variation between one
proportion to other and one age to other is in slight manner, shown in Table 12.
Table 12 Spilt tensile strength of concrete for M30 control mix for 3,7,28 days
MIX PROPORTION
3 days
N/mm2
7 days
N/mm2
28 days
N/mm2
50%MK+50%GGBS 3.32 3.52 3.6
40%MK+60%GGBS 3.70 3.89 4.10
30%MK+70%GGBS 3.79 3.92 4.23
20%MK+80%GGBS 4.12 4.56 4.65
10%MK+90%GGBS 5.32 5.69 5.89
0%MK+100%GGBS 6.32 6.45 6.63
5.3. Flexural strength
The beam specimens of size 100 × 100 × 500mm were considered for testing. The flexural strength
of geopolymer concrete are tabulated in Table. Strength varies in indirect proportion to proportion
of metakaolin content. T = 3P/ BD2
. If concrete is to serve the purpose for which it is designed during
its intended lifetime, it has to be durable. Many RCC structures built in past have shown signs of
distress mainly due to chemical attack. To evaluate an alternative binder instead of Cement for
concrete to reduce Co2 emissions. To develop a concrete with 100% replacement of cement. To
develop a Multi-beneficial concrete in the aspects of compressive strength and ecofriendly. To work
out and enhance the concrete for durability to determine the suitability of Mk and GGBS. The sodium
hydroxide is added to the water and stirred about fifteen minutes to get cool down. Then the sodium
silicate is added to solution. This solution is used after 24 hours of its preparation. The type of alkali
for Mk or GGBS is to accurately determine. The weight loss due to immersion of specimens in
solution can be evaluated after a period of time, shown in Table 13.
Table 13 Flexural strength strength of concrete for M30 control mix for 3,7,28 days
MIX PROPORTION
3 days
N/mm2
7 days
N/mm2
28 days
N/mm2
50%MK+50%GGBS 0.69 0.745 0.78
40%MK+60%GGBS 0.78 0.82 1.11
30%MK+70%GGBS 1.02 1.48 1.62
20%MK+80%GGBS 1.55 1.57 1.69
10%MK+90%GGBS 1.82 2.32 2.52
0%MK+100%GGBS 2.79 3.21 3.32

5.4. Durability Study
Durability is a major factor to be considered for the structure to with stand for a long period i.e the
age of the structure should be more durable. So my experimental investigation take me to identify
the structural behavior on different environmental like Chloride attack, Acid attack and Sulphate
attack. But in this report work is concentrated on sulphate attack. Therefore the results and
discussions are processed as follows, shown in Table 14-15.
Table 14 Reduction in weight
S.no MIX ID
Weight of
Specimens
(grams)
Reduction in
weight
(grams)
% Reduction
in weight
No. of days
Initial Final
1 50%M.k + 50% GGBS 8217 8102 115 1.4 20
2 30%M.K + 70% GGBS 8712 8681 31 0.35 20
3 0%+100% GGBS 8432 8384 48 0.57 20
Table 15 Compressive strength of GPC after exposure to sulphate solution
S.no MIX ID
Compressive
strength (N/mm2
)
% Reduction in
C.S
No. of days for
chemical curing
Initial Final
1 50%M.k + 50% GGBS 37.084 34.21 8.38 20
2 30%M.k + 70% GGBS 42.782 38.29 11.72 20
3 0%+100%GGBS 52.02 44.17 17.70 20
6. CONCLUSIONS
Based on limited experimental investigations conducted on concrete the following conclusion are
drawn
• From the above results it is apparent that Geopolymer concrete based on GGBS and metakaolin has
got more compressive strength than conventional concrete.
• The strength of the Geopolymer concrete increases with the increase in GGBS content up to 50%and
then reduces, so it is recommended to use GGBS up to 50% in the GPC mixes.
• The results showed that the substitution of 50% Metakaolin and 50% GGBS content induced higher
compressive strength.
• Specimens provided with oven cooling tend to exhibit rigidity and comprehensive strength.
• By using Metakaolin and GGBS as a filler or replacement in GPC concrete will reduce environmental
pollution as they are reason for getting turned the agricultural land to barren land when they are
disposed as wastes.
• Increase in molarity of NaOH as an alkaline activator appears to provide better compressive strength
when compared with lesser molarity.
• Mix with 50% of GGBS and 50% of metakaolin seems to have better compressive strength than other
mixes. This may be due to increase in alkaline reaction between GGBS particles and calcium in
metakaolin.
• The green concrete resists the attack of various chemicals and therefore, it is durable for the given
mix proportion.

REFERENCES
[1] Setty M S. Concrete Technology. S. Chand Publishing, 1st
Edition, 2004.
[2] Davidovits J. Soft Mineralogy and Geopolymer. Proceedings of the Geopolymer 88 International
Conference, The University de Technologie, Compiègne, France, 1988.
[3] Davidovits, J. 1984. “Pyramids of Egypt Made of Man- Made Stone, Myth or Fact?” Symposium
on Archaeometry 1984. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
[4] Geopolymer Institute. 2010. What Is a Geopolymer? Introduction. Institut Géopolymère, Saint-
Quentin, France. Accessed on January 29, 2010.
[5] Palomo A, Macias A, Blanco MT, Puertas F. Physical, chemical and mechanical characterization
of geopolymers. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Congress on the Chem of Cem; 1992.
[6] Min Ski Kim, YubanJun, ChangshaLee and Jae Eun Oh. (2013). Use of CaO as An
ActivatorforProducing a Price Competitive Non-Cement structural Binder Using Ground
Granulated Blast Furnace Slag. Journal Cement and ConcreteResearch.
[7] Mohamed Heikal, S. Abd El Aleem, W.M. Morsi (2013).Characteristics of Blended Cements
Containing Nano-Silica. Housing and Building National Research Center Journal.
[8] P. Ganapati Naidu, et al (2012), “A Study On Strength Properties of Geopolymer Concrete With
Addition of G.G.B.S” International Journal of Engineering Research and Development Vol2,
Issue 4, PP. 19-28.
[9] Madheswaran.C.K, et al (2013), “Effect of molarity in geopolymer concrete.” International
Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering. Vol-4
[10] B.J. Mathew, et al (2013). “Strength, Economic and Sustainability Characteristics of GGBS
Based Geopolymer Concrete.” International Journal of Computational Engineering Research.
Vol-3.
[11] Neetu Singh,et al, (2013), “Effect of Aggressive Chemical Environment on Durability of Green
Geopolymer Concrete” International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT)
Volume 3, Issue 4, October 2013.
[12] Bapugouda Patil,et al, (2015), “Durability Studies on Sustainable Geopolymer concrete”
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) Volume: 02 Issue: 04.
[13] Hardjito D, Wallah S, Sumajouw DMJ and Rangan BV (2004) on the development of GGBS–
based geopolymer Concrete. ACI. Mater. J, 101 (6), 467–472.
[14] P. Uday Kumar and B. Sarath Chandra Kumar, Flexural Behaviour of Reinforced Geopolymer
Concrete Beams with GGBS and Metakaoline. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 7(6), 2016, pp.260–277.
[15] 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.
[16] Dr. Aradhana Mehta and Kuldeep Kumar, Strength and Durability Characteristics of Fly Ash and
Slag Based Geopolymer Concrete. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,
7(5), 2016, pp.305–314.
[17] K Venkateswara Rao, A.H.L.Swaroop, Dhanasri K and Sailaja K, Study on Strength Properties
of Low Calcium Based Geopolymer Concrete. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 6(11), 2015, pp. 149-155.
[18] Hardjito D, Wallah S, Sumajouw DMJ and Rangan BV (2004) on the development of GGBS–
based geopolymer Concrete. ACI. Mater. J, 101 (6), 467–472.

STUDY OF THE PROPERTIES OF METAKIOLIN AND GGBS BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to STUDY OF THE PROPERTIES OF METAKIOLIN AND GGBS BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

More from IAEME Publication

Recently uploaded

STUDY OF THE PROPERTIES OF METAKIOLIN AND GGBS BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE