Assessment of Mechanical Characteristics of

Volume 12, Issue 5, May 2023
Impact Factor: 8.423

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
|e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 8.423| A Monthly Peer Reviewed & Referred Journal |
|| Volume 12, Issue 5, May 2023 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
Assessment of Mechanical Characteristics Of

Fly Ash, Microsilica & Steel Fibre Based One
Part Geopolymer Concrete
Dr. Walavekar P. P, Tejraj B. Deshmukh, Gitanjali M. Ghone
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Zeal College of Engineering and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India
U.G. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Zeal College of Engineering and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India
U.G. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Zeal College of Engineering and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India
ABSTRACT: Production of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) is a carbon-intensive process that generates significant
amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas from the combustion of fossil fuels and thermal decomposition of limestone.
Overall, cement industries are responsible for around 7 % of global CO2 emissions which poses a considerable threat to
global climate change because of its greenhouse effects. The recent advent of geopolymer shows great potential to
reduce carbon footprints by utilizing the industrial by-products, such as fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag
(GGBS) and convert into a binding material. Generally, geopolymer binders are made using aluminosilicate
compounds (fly ash and or GGBS) and an alkali activator (combination of sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide
solution). Despite having superior engineering properties to conventional OPC concrete, geopolymer concrete has not
been widely adopted in concrete industry so far. The safety hazards in mixing and handling geopolymer concrete posed
by sodium hydroxide was one of the barriers to the adaptation of geopolymer concrete. Replacing liquid sodium
hydroxide with less hazardous alkali materials, such as soda ash not only makes the geopolymer binder less hazardous
and easier for mixing and handling process but also makes it more environmentally sustainable because of its lower
embodied energy compared to sodium hydroxide. This study investigates the environmental sustainability of structural
grade of geopolymer concrete and compares theresults with GPC concrete of same strength grade. This study also
investigates comparisons between geopolymer concrete tests and US GPC tests results
KEYWORDS: Geopolymer(GPC), Sustainable, Steel Fibres, Mechanical characteristics, Microsilica, Fly ash.
I. INTRODUCTION
Concrete is the most widely used material next to water, and its production dates back to ancient Egyptian and Roman
societies. The worldwide production of Portland cement contributes to 5–7% of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emission
due to burning of fossil fuels during calcinations of limestone which is creating a serious environmental threat. Hence,
cement does not satisfy the criteria of being a sustainable material and construction industries need substitute
cementitious products to meet the demands of rapid infrastructure growth. Joseph Davidovits, a French scientist, coined
the term ‘Geopolymer’ in 1978 and described the process of Geopolymerization that produced compounds having
cementitious properties. To reduce cement consumption and thereby limiting the carbon footprint is paramount. To this
end, to replace cement in concrete production, industrial byproducts such as fly ash, ground granulated blastfurnace
slag (GGBS), fumed silica can be used. Adding these supplementary cementitious materials can reduce reducing the
emission of carbon dioxide into the atm.
II. RELATED WORK
Kolli.Ramujeea (2017),[1] their study, the regression model analysis was carried out to study the relationship
between the Compressive strength and Split tensile strength and It was found that the mechanical behaviour of GPC is
similar to that of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) concrete. In this experimental work, fly ash is used as the source
material to make geopolymer paste as the binder, to produce concrete. The role and influence of aggregates are
considered to be same as in the Portland cement concrete. The mass of combined aggregates may be taken to be
between 75% and 80% of the mass of the Geopolymer concrete. The mix proportions for Geopolymer concretes of
three grades namely G20, G40 & G60 were arrived based on the trial mixes carried out by the author in the laboratory
and for control mix the corresponding grades were taken in equivalent mix proportions of Geopolymer concrete. Based
IJIRSET©2023 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 6979

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
on the applicability evaluation empirical reactions to GPC and the regression analysis on experimental data and
mechanical properties of GPC [2] Jena, et al. (2019), their study stated that fresh density of all the specimens of
different mixes was higher than that of the hardened concrete. This is only due to excess water available in the
specimen. The hardened densities of GPS5, GPS10 and GPS15 are 0.9%, 3.15% and 4.5% lower than that of GPS0.
The fresh densities of GPS5, GPS10 and GPS15 are 1.4%, 2.6% and 4.8% lower than the GPS0.Slump value of GPS5
was decreased 33% than that of the control mix at constant water-to-binder ratio. Further, the slump value of GPS10
and GPS15 was increased 14% and 47%, respectively due to the addition of extra water of 10 kg/m3. Split tensile and
flexural strength of GPS5 were 30% and 33.7% higher than that of the control mix, respectively. [3] Mandal, et al.
(2019), aimed was enhancement in strength and durability performance of fly ash based process modified geopolymer
concrete. An 8M NaOH solution was mixed with Na2Sio3 in the proportion of 1:1.75 (by weight) to prepare the
activator fluid for both process modified GPC and conventional heat cured GPC. The low calcium fly ash based process
modified geopolymer concrete cured at ambient temperature after casting shows improved mechanical strength and
durability than conventional heat cured GPC and OPC concrete. [4] Hassan, et al. (2019), aimed to Use of geopolymer
concrete for a cleaner and sustainable environment – A review of mechanical properties and microstructure. and stated
that, the past researches on GPC show that it can be suitable for the structural applications, with a workable slump, and
comparable grade of strength to ordinary Portland cement concrete. The development of a standard code for GPC is
still in the experimental stage. the development of the mix proportion of GPC is more difficult due to a range of
parameters being involved in the matrix of geopolymer concrete [5] Rao, et al. (2020), studied Ground granulated blast
furnace slag (GGBFS) was blended with fly ash (FA) to form binder content (B) and combined at different ratios with a
solution of various alkaline activators (ALA) to make Geopolymer concrete (GPC). The ALA solution consisted of a
mixture of sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH), with a stable NaOH concentration of 12 M and
14 M (Molarities) and a Na2SiO3/NaOH mass ratio from 2.5 to 3.5. The GPC mixes were prepared with different
ALA/B ratios (0.3, 0.35 and 0.40). All of the mixes were cured under ambient conditions. To analyses, the impact of
the ALA/B ratio on the GPC, the compressive, flexural strength and splitting tensile strengths of hardened GPC were
investigated at the ages of 7, 28 and 90 days. The experimental results showed that varying the ALA/B ratio had an
influence on the compressive strength of GPC. The Compressive strength was higher at an ALA/B ratio of 0.4 than at
both higher and lower ratios. At this optimum ALA/B ratio, the compressive strength of up to 64.13 N/mm2 was
recorded at 90 days. [6] Muruguan et al. (2020), aimed to understand the effect of alcconfine as ternary binder in
Geopolymer concrete at low molarities of NaOH based alkaline solution under ambient temperature curing. They are
also focused on to enhanced the mechanical properties of GPC by comparing of OPC they were considered following
factors in their mix design of GPC Alkaline to binder 0.4, water to binder by under 0.18 and Na2SiO3 NaOH 2.5, and
alkaline solution should be prepared at least 24 hour before mixing in the concrete molarities of NaOH are 0.5, 1, 2 and
3 in all the placement levels of fly ash with all alccofine i.e.5%, 10% and 15 %.
III. PROPOSED ALGORITHM

Mix design:
1. Parameters consider for mix propositioning of geopolymer concrete for the development of fly ash base Geo
polymer concrete make design method detailed investigation have been carried out and following parameters
where selected on the basis of a capability and compressive strength.
2. Preparation of polymer concrete mixes preparation of Geo polymer concrete is similar to that of cement concrete
course aggregate sand and fly ash where mix indrasted then add prepared mixture solution of sodium hydroxide
and sodium silicate along with extra water based on water to geopolymer binder ratio and mix thoroughly3- 4
minutes so as to give homogeneous mix it was found that the fresh fly ash based concrete was viscous, cohesive
and dark in colour
 SIEVEANALYSIS INSAND Required apparatus

Observations and Calculations-
WEIGHT OF SAMPLE (GM): -

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
Table-1:Measurements for Sieve analysis Test
ISSieveSiz Wt.ofSample Individual%wt. Cumulative %wt. %Passing

e
retained(gm) Retained(gm) Retained
4.75mm 2025 19.87 99.3 0.6
2.36mm 70 70 3.5 96.5
1.18mm 98 168 8.4 91.6
600mic 6560 1153.5 57.68 42.33
300mic 726.5 1880 94 6
150mic 95 1975 98.75 1.25
PanTot 25 2000 100 0
4.3 DETERMINATIONOF WATER ABSORPTION OF COARSE AGGREGATE

Observations and calculations–
Table -2:Measurements for water absorption of Coarse aggregate Test
Coarse Aggregate Sample (Gm)
Sr.no Particular
1 2 3
1 Weight ofsurfacesaturateddry sample in waterw1 1560 1555 1570.3
2 Date of surface saturated dry sample in air w2 2440.7 2432.5 2440
3 Weight of ovendrysampleaggregatein airw3 2439.4 2430 2434.6
4 Specific gravity of coarse aggregate 2.76 2.77 2.79
5 Water absorption of coarse aggregate 0.05 0.10 0.22
Result–
Averagewater absorption of coarseaggregateof12.5mmis0.12%.
average specific gravity of coarse aggregate of coarse aggregate of 12.5mm is 2.76 .
DETERMINATION OF IMPACT VALUE OF AGGREGATE
Observations and Calculations–
Table -3:DeterminationofImpactvalue
Sr. Samples (Gm)

Particular
No. 1 2 3
1 Wt.ofovendrysample (W1) 660 630 630
Wt. of fractionpassingthroughIS.2.36mm
2 10 30 20
sieve(W2)

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
3 Wt. of fractionretainonIS2.36mm Sieve (W3) 650 600 610

Aggregate impact value of coarse aggregate(%)
4 1.51 4.76 3.17
[W2/W1x100]
The average Aggregate impact value of coarse aggregateis3.14%
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
WORKABILITY TEST (SLUMP CONE TEST)
WORKABILITY OF CONCRETE IS A BROAD AND SUBJECTIVE TERM DESCRIBING HOW EASILY FRESHLY MIXED CONCRETE
CAN BE MIXED, PLACED, CONSOLIDATED, AND FINISHED WITH MINIMAL LOSS OF
OBSERVATIONS AND CALCULATIONS -
TABLE -4:WORKABILITY
FLY ASH NORMAL GPC ULTRA SLUMP

SAFE
GPC
50% ✔ 120
50% ✔ 90
50% ✔ 95
70% ✔ 120
70% ✔ 105
70% ✔ 95
80% ✔ 120
80% ✔ 100
80% ✔ 100
95% ✔ 120
95% ✔ 90
95% ✔ 90
100% ✔ 120

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
 COMPRESSIVESTRENGTHTEST
Table-5:Average Compressive Strength
Sr. Fly NaOH Na2CO3 Soda Normal Ultra Prop1 Prop2 Compressive Strength in
No Ash Ash GPC Safe MPA
GPC 7 14 28
Days Days Days
1 50% Yes Yes 21.33 28.23 28.53
2 50% Yes Yes Yes 21.69 28.44 28.74
3 50% Yes Yes Yes 22.44 28.56 28.89
4 70% Yes Yes 6.66 7.998 8.88
5 70% Yes Yes Yes 6.666 7.2 8.91
6 70% Yes Yes Yes 9.768 12.438 13.56
7 80% Yes Yes 13.328 13.44 15.639
8 80% Yes Yes Yes 10.5 10.74 11.76
9 80% Yes Yes Yes 11.4 11.607 12.57
10 95% Yes Yes 3 3.63 4.08
11 95% Yes Yes Yes 3.6 4.08 4.74
12 95% Yes Yes Yes 4.2 10.5 10.836
13 100% Yes Yes 0.3 0.3 0.3

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
6. Compressive strength Results ( Pie Chart)
Quantities For 3 Cubes of 50% Flyash

Above pie chart shows detaileds about 50% fly ash cubes specimen.
V. CONCLUSION
1. The collective results of the study of various experiments Shows that the stress imposed on 50% flyash concrete
cube was (the value for prop 1 and prop 2) almost to 100% as satisfactory results and therefore more detailed study
can be carried to improve its strength and other mechanical properties
2. Using US-GPC with replacement to Cement at 50% gives the satisfactory results with highest possible strength
comparing to on field 30% replacement with actual trials of 95%, 80%, 70%, 50% replacement of cement in this
project.
3. Sodium Carbonate powder was replaced with Soda Ash because it has Crystalizing molecules in its structure
causing solution to get solid a day prior to casting.
4. Sodium Carbonate cannot be used even before 15 mins of casting because it has high heat of hydration when
mixed with sodium which causes absorption of more water than its water content limit.
REFERENCES
1. Adak, D., Asce, A. M., and Mandal, S. (2019). Strength and Durability Performance of Fly Ash-Based Process-
Modified Geopolymer Concrete. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
2. Aisheh, Y. I. A., Atrushi, D. S., Akeed, M. H., Qaidi, S., and Tayeh, B. A. (2022). Influence of steel fibers and
microsilica on the mechanical properties of ultra-highperformance geopolymer concrete (UHP-GPC). Case Studies
in Construction Materials, 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01245
3. Hassan, A., Arif, M., and Shariq, M. (2019). Use of geopolymer concrete for a cleaner and sustainable
environment – A review of mechanical properties and microstructure. In Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 223,
pp. 704–728). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.051

| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2023.1205387 |
4. Jena, S., Panigrahi, R., and Sahu, P. (2019). Mechanical and Durability Properties of Fly Ash Geopolymer
Concrete with Silica Fume. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series A, 100(4), 697–705.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-019-00400-z
5. Krishna Rao, A., and Rupesh Kumar, D. (2020). Effect of various alkaline binder ratio on geopolymer concrete
under ambient curing condition. Materials Today: Proceedings, 27, 1768–1773.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.682
6. Mermerdaş, K., İpek, S., Algın, Z., Ekmen, Ş., and Güneş, İ. (2020). Combined effects of microsilica, steel fibre
and artificial lightweight aggregate on the shrinkage and mechanical performance of high strength cementitious
composite. Construction and Building Materials, 262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120048

8.423

Assessment of Mechanical Characteristics of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment of Mechanical Characteristics of

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment of Mechanical Characteristics of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Volume 12, Issue 5, May 2023

Impact Factor: 8.423

|| Volume 12, Issue 5, May 2023 ||