The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008 A.

37

IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STRENGTH AND WATER PENETRABILITY OF LOW CALCIUM FLY ASH BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE
Monita Olivia- PhD Student; Hamid Nikraz- Professor; Prabir Sarker- Lecturer Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia

ABSTRACT: This paper presents a study on strength development and water penetrability improvements of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete. Some mixtures with different water/binder ratio, aggregate/binder ratio, aggregate grading, alkaline/fly ash ratio were investigated. OPC concrete with the same strength level were used as a reference material. The strength was measured by compressive strength, while the water penetrability was evaluated by water absorption, Apparent Volume of Permeable Voids (AVPV), sorptivity and water permeability. The results show that the strength of fly ash geopolymer concrete can be improved by reducing the water/binder and aggregate/binder ratios. The water penetrability of low calcium fly ash geopolymer was found improved with decreasing the water/binder ratio, increasing the fly ash content, and using a well-graded aggregate. The test data indicates that a good quality of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete can be produced with the proper mix design. KEYWORDS: AVPV,

geopolymer, permeability, sorptivity, strength, water absorption

1. INTRODUCTION Fly ash based geopolymer concrete has emerged as a new technology in construction material by utilizing 100% fly ash activated with alkaline solutions. The alkaline solutions in a combination of sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate react with sodium and alumina in the fly ash to produce a compact cementing material. This material possesses many good mechanical properties and durability [1-3]. Previous findings show the final properties of geopolymer are affected by the concentration and type of alkaline solution, curing method and temperature, rest period, water content, nature of source material, and the ratio of fly ash to alkaline solution [4-6]. The performance of concrete is determined by its strength and durability properties. To obtain a good quality concrete, these properties can be improved by reducing the water content, increasing the binder and aggregate content, using a well-graded aggregate, good curing method and better compaction [7-9]. Further, the strength and durability of concrete are also influenced by the amount, size and type of pores. Strength is influenced by the amount of pores, while durability is affected by the volume, size and continuity of the pores [7]. Since geopolymer concrete is a concrete-like material, then incorporating some factors affecting concrete in general may improve the strength and durability properties of geopolymers. The concept of improvement in the strength and durability of the geopolymer is also based on varying the parameters affecting the final properties to produce high strength with low porosity and continuous pores concrete. Water penetrability is defined as the degree to which a material permits the transport gases, liquids or ionic species through it. Water can be harmful for concrete, because of its ability to leach calcium hydroxide from the cement paste, to carry harmful dissolved species such as chlorides or acids into the concrete, to form ice in large pores in the paste, and to cause leaching 384

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008 of compounds from the concrete [10]. Water absorption, sorptivity and water permeability measurement are some methods to determine the water penetrability of concrete. The objective of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of changing the parameters namely water/binder ratio, grading of aggregate, aggregate/binder ratio and fly ash content to improve performance of the concrete, in terms of compressive strength, water absorption, AVPV, sorptivity and water permeability. OPC concrete with the same strength level was tested to compare the properties. Based on the results, the influence of water/binder ratio, grading of aggregate, aggregate/binder ratio and fly ash content upon the concrete properties will be discussed in this paper.

2. STUDY OF STRENGTH AND WATER PENETRABILITY IMPROVEMENTS OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE 2.1 Experimental program 2.1.1 Materials

Geopolymer concrete was made from low calcium fly ash with a combination of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and sodium silicate solution (Na2SiO3). NaOH in the form of pellets (40.40%) was diluted by water (59.60%) to obtain a concentration of 14M. The sodium silicate used has a Na2O to SiO2 ratio of 2, and was supplied by PQ Australia. Superplasticizer (naphthalene based) was included to improve the workability of the geopolymer mixture. The fine aggregate was an uncrushed sand dune, whereas the coarse aggregate was a crushed aggregate. Table 1 shows the chemical composition of fly ash from the Collie power station, Western Australia. Table 1. Chemical composition of fly ash (XRF analysis)
Elements % by mass SiO2 50.3 Al2O3 26.3 Fe2O3 13.6 CaO 2.27 K 2O 0.55 MgO 1.44 Na2O 0.36 P 2O 5 1.58 SO3 0.32 LOI 0.54

2.1.2

Details of mixture proportions, casting and curing of the specimens

Table 2 displays the mixture proportion of the geopolymer concrete in this research. The basic geopolymer mixture proportion (mix GP1) was selected from previous proposed mixtures [11]. Table 2. Mixture proportioning of the concrete
Quantity (kg/m3) Fly NaOH Sand S.S ash (14M) 7mm 10mm 20mm C1 0.53 205 386 621 562 637 C2 0.50 188 377 635 574 642 GP1 0.23 3.9 0.35 25.8 647 554 647 408 41 103 GP2 0.22 3.9 0.35 20.7 647 554 647 408 41 103 GP3 0.20 3.9 0.35 16.5 647 554 647 408 41 103 GP4 0.25 3.9 0.35 36.2 647 554 647 408 41 103 GP5 0.22 3.5 0.35 25.8 630 540 630 444 44 111 GP6 0.24 4.7 0.35 25.8 672 576 672 356 36 89 GP7 0.23 3.9 0.35 25.8 645 370 277 554 408 41 103 GP8 0.23 3.9 0.30 25.8 647 554 647 424 36 91 Note: C = OPC/control mixture, GP = Geopolymer mixture, w/c = water cement ratio, w/b = water/binder ratio, a/b = aggregate/binder ratio, alk/FA = alkaline/fly ash ratio, S.S = Sodium Silicate; S.P = Superplasticizer Water Cement Mixture no w/c w/b a/b alk/FA ratio Coarse Aggregate S.P 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1

385

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008 The mixture was chosen to produce geopolymer concrete with properties and performance equivalent to OPC concrete with a strength of 35 MPa. It has a water/binder ratio of 0.23 with 25.8 kg/m3 extra water, an aggregate/binder ratio of 3.9, an alkaline/fly ash ratio of 0.35 and uses 7:10mm grading of aggregates. Some mixtures of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete were developed by varying the water/binder ratio in the range of 0.20-0.25, aggregate/binder ratio in the range of 3.5-4.7, two different aggregate grading (7:10mm, 7:10:20mm) and two alkaline/fly ash ratios (0.30-0.35). Two control mixes of OPC concrete were made by varying the water/cement ratio to achieve the same level of strength with geopolymer concrete. OPC concrete specimens were prepared according to AS 1012.2-1983. Low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete was made according to the mixing procedure from previous research [11]. The chemical solution consisted of NaOH (14M), sodium silicate, extra water and superplasticizer was prepared approximately 2 hours before the mixing process. In this process, the fly ash and aggregates were blended for three minutes. Then, a chemical solution was poured slowly to the dry mix. The pan mixer continued to mix all ingredients for another four minutes to achieve a uniform mix. All OPC and geopolymer concrete specimens were cast in concrete cylinders of 100x200mm. Those samples were cured by steam at a temperature of 600C for 24 hours. Then the specimens were left for air curing in a control environment with a temperature of 23-250C until testing. 2.1.3 Test methods

Water absorption and volume of permeable voids determination were carried out according to ASTM C642. The water absorption and AVPV percentages were calculated by equations: M Md Water absorption = ( s ) 100 (1) Md g g1 AVPV = ( 2 )100 (2) g2 where Ms = mass of surface-dried sample (g), Md = mass of oven dried sample (g), g2 = apparent density (Mg/m3), g1 = bulk density, dry (Mg/m3) Sorptivity test was carried out according to the method described by Hall [12]. The weight gain of the specimen at set time intervals of 5 min, 10 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h and 4 h was measured. Then uptake of water per unit area of concrete surface I (g/mm) followed a linear relationship with the square root of time for the suction periods (t), hence: I = C + St0.5 (3) where S, the sorptivity is the slope of the I vs t0.5 plot and can be obtained by linear regression. Water permeability test was carried out based on the GHD Water Permeability method (previously Taywood Engineering Ltd). These specimens were dried in the oven at 1050C until constant mass. The specimens were coated with epoxy on the circular side to prevent water penetration from that side during the test. A pressure of 850 kPa was applied to the samples at pressure head of 92.5 m. After the specimen was saturated, then the flow rate reading was taken using burette by measuring the changing of volume of water over time. The permeability was defined by Darcys Law as follows: QL k= (4) AH where k = permeability coefficients (m/s), Q = flow rate (m3/s), A = area (m2), L = depth of specimen (m), H = head of water (m). 386

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008

2.2 Test results and discussion

The slump value, density and compressive strength development of geopolymer concrete are presented in Table 3. The slump values of all geopolymer mixes were in a range of 230-270 mm. The density of geopolymer concrete was in the range of 2248-2294 gr/cm3. Table 3. Compressive strength development of geopolymer concrete
Mixture no C1 C2 GP1 GP2 GP3 GP4 GP5 GP6 GP7 GP8 Slump (mm) 200 80 260 230 270 270 260 240 260 250 Density (gr/cm3) 28 days 2302.48 2423.77 2248.49 2294.55 2336.04 2286.36 2281.61 2282.43 2289.01 2288.71 Compressive strength 7 days 39.68 30.92 38.32 67.09 45.96 24.19 32.45 35.14 28 days 34.09 47.50 34.86 41.36 67.53 25.28 48.06 25.44 36.13 35.51

From Table 3, it can be seen that an improvement in the strength of geopolymer concrete can be achieved by the decreasing water/binder ratio and aggregate/binder ratio. It is found that water plays an important role in the geopolymerization process [13]. The decrease in water content favours the formation of the geopolymer and the hardening of the concrete. The NaOH and silicate concentration in the mix increases by the decreasing the water content, then accelerating the geopolymerization process. Furthermore, inclusion of high alkaline solution content to the mix increases the strength, because it enhances the geopolymerization by promoting bond of geopolymer poduct which affect the final strength of concrete [14].
2.2.2 Water penetrability

2.2.2.1 Water absorption & AVPV

Figure 1 (a), (b), (c) and (d) show the comparison of water absorption and AVPV of concrete with different water/binder ratio, aggregate/binder ratio, alkaline/fly ash ratio and grading. The percentage of water absorption of the geopolymer concrete for the whole variation was in a range of 3.72-4.58%. According to BS 1881 specification [15], concrete with typical absorption values in the range of 3-5% was classified as an average concrete. AVPV represents the pore space percentage measured by boiling the saturated concrete. Moreover, according to Vicroads specification, this concrete was classified good, since the percentage of AVPV was 8.9312.58% [16]. It was observed that the water absorption of geopolymer concrete reduced with decreasing water content, binder content, alkaline solution content and better aggregate grading. As can be expected, the same trend was applied for the AVPV values. For all parameters, the OPC concrete exhibited higher water absorption and AVPV than the geopolymer concrete. It indicates that steam-cured OPC concrete has high capillary porosity concrete. In this stage, there was no continuous hydration to fill and reduce the continuity of the pores. This condition resulted on coarser microstructure and higher porosity on the concrete [17].

387

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008

Water absorption/AVPV (%)

Water absorption/AVPV (%) 0.25 0.23 0.22 w/b ratio AVPV 0.20

14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00

14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 C1 3.5 3.9 a/b ratio Water absorption AVPV 4.7

Water absorption

(a)
Water absorption/AVPV (%)

(b)
Water absorption/AVPV (%) 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 C1 7:10 grading type Water absorption AVPV 7:10:20

14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 C1 0.35 0.30 alkaline/fly ash ratio Water absorption AVPV

(c) (d) Figure 1. Water absorption and AVPV with variation of (a) water/binder ratio, (b) aggregate/binder ratio, (c) alkaline/fly ash ratio, (d) grading type
Water absorption/AVPV (%) 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 GP1 GP5 GP6 mix type Water absorption AVPV GP7 GP8

Figure 2. Water absorption and AVPV with the same extra water content

Figure 2 shows the water absorption and AVPV variation of different mix types with the same extra water. This figure proved water influences the pore formation in high binder content mix of the geopolymer concrete. There was an improvement in water absorption and AVPV percentage for other mixes with variation of aggregate content, grading and binder content. 388

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008

Hence for the same extra water content added in the mixture, adding more aggregate, using wellgraded aggregate and increasing the fly ash content can improve these characteristics.
2.2.2.2 Sorptivity

Table 4 shows sorptivity values for control and geopolymer concrete at various water/binder ratio, aggregate binder ratio and aggregate grading. Sorptivity is the rate of absorption of water by capillary suction of concrete [12]. The results indicated that the sorptivity was significantly lower for all the geopolymer mixes than the control mix (C2). For all geopolymer mixes, the sorptivity can be improved with a decrease of water content (except for mix GP3) and increase of fly ash content. The anomalous behaviour of mix GP3 which supposedly performed the lowest sorptivity among all mixes, was assumed as a variation of samples in the one mix. As shown, the sorptivity values were in the range of Hall recommendation [12] for concrete with a water cement ratio of 0.40-0.60 (sorptivity values are 0.094-0.170).
Table 4. Sorptivity of control and geopolymer concrete with regression coefficients Mixture no
C2 GP1 GP2 GP3 GP4 GP5 GP6 GP7 GP8
4.00 3.50 3.00 I (mm) 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.0
GP 4 GP 5 GP 3

Sorptivity (x10-4 mm/s0.5)

R value
0.9971 0.9924 0.9897 0.9945 0.9963 0.9912 0.9945 0.9930 0.9945

5.0 10.0 15.0 0.5 Square root of time, min

20.0
GP 2 C2 GP 8

Figure 5. Comparison of capillary absorption rate of geopolymer concrete

Figure 5 shows a comparison of sorptivity of geopolymer concrete and the corresponding control mix. A typical geopolymer concrete mix (GP2) exhibits lower sorptivity than the corresponding control mix (C2), which again illustrates the effect of binder content and thus the capillary pores on the sorptivity. The low slope of the geopolymer concrete shows a reduced moisture intake as compared to the corresponding control mix (steam-cured OPC concrete).
2.2.2.3 Water permeability

Table 5 indicates that the water permeability coefficient of geopolymer also has a tendency to increase with an increase of water/binder ratio. The permeability of high water/binder ratio concrete was greater because of the presence of larger capillary pores. However, those values are still in the range of water permeability coefficient for concrete with an average quality (10-1110-12 m/s) according to Concrete Society Technical Report 54 [18]. As observed from Table 5, mix GP3 with water/binder ratio 0.20 shows the lowest water permeability coefficient. A decrease of water permeability coefficient actually indicated the geopolymer product filled the concrete, hence there was a lesser gap between the existing grains (sand, aggregate, partly/reacted, and reacted/unreacted fly ash particles) [19]. Mix GP7 with aggregate grading (7, 389

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008

10, 20mm) also showed low water permeability and void content. Results confirmed that the improvement in the geopolymer concrete permeability can be achieved by decreasing water/binder ratio and using a well-graded aggregate. A decrease in water/binder ratio and use of well-graded aggregate was specified by the guidelines to reduce the water permeability of OPC concrete [8, 9]. Table 5. Water permeability coefficients of geopolymer concrete with different mixes
Mixture no GP1 GP2 GP3 GP5 GP7 Water permeability coefficient (x10-11 m/s) 4.67 3.95 2.46 2.91 2.61 Void content (%) 10.5 13 10.8 10 8.2

The percentage of void content was in the range of average concrete (10-15%, BS 1881 [18]). It is obvious from Table 5 that the percentage of void content might not affect the water permeability coefficient of the geopolymer concrete significantly. It can be assumed that the pore continuity contributes more to a high water permeability coefficient for mix GP1. In the case of geopolymer concrete, blocking of the pores may be stopped after the accelerated steam curing process ceased. Thus, the ability to fill the pore structure depends mainly on the curing process.

3. CONCLUSIONS
From the above experimental results, the following conclusions are drawn: 1. The study showed that the strength of geopolymer concrete can be improved by decreasing the water/binder and aggregate/binder ratios. It was observed that water influences the geopolymerization process and the hardening of the concrete. Inclusion of an increased binder content enhances the geopolymerization and affects the final strength of concrete. 2. Water absorption of the geopolymer concrete showed that the concrete could be classified as an average concrete, based on BS 1881 specification. While according to the AVPV values from Vicroads, this concrete was classified as a good concrete. Further, water absorption and AVPV can be improved with a decrease in the water content, binder content, alkaline solution content and with a well-graded aggregate. 3. Sorptivity of the geopolymer concrete was in the range of Hall recommendation. The sorptivity can be improved by a decrease in the water content and an increase in the fly ash content. 4. Water permeability of the geopolymer concrete was influenced by the water/binder ratio and a well-graded aggregate. The pore continuity contributes most with this property, since the mechanism to block the pores ceases after the steam curing process.

REFERENCES
1. Davidovits, J. (1994). High alkali cements for 21st century concretes. In Concrete Technology, Past, Present and Future. Proceedings of V Mohan Malhotra Symposium. Mehta, K. (ed.). ACI Special Publication. 390

The 3rd ACF International Conference- ACF/VCA 2008

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10.

11.

12. 13.

14.

15. 16.

17. 18. 19.

Sofi, M., van Deventer, J.S.J., Mendis, P.A. & Lukey, G.C. (2007). Engineering properties of inorganic polymer concretes (IPCs). Cement & Concrete Research. Vol 37, pp 251-257. Wallah, S.E., Hardjito, D., Sumajouw, D.M.J. & Rangan, B.V. (2003). Sulfate resistance of fly ash based geopolymer concrete. In Proceedings of Concrete in the Third Millenium: Then 21st century Biennial Conference of the The Concrete Institute of Australia. 2003. Fernandez-Jimenez, A., Palomo, J.G. & Puertas, F. (1999). Alkali activated slag mortars: mechanical strength behaviour. Cement and Concrete Research. Vol 29, pp 1313-1321. Hardjito, D., Wallah, S.E., Sumajouw, D.M.J, & Rangan, B.V. (2004). On the development of fly ash based geopolymer concrete. ACI Materials Journal. Vol 101, pp 467-472. van Jaarsveld, J.G.S, van Deventer, J.S.J. & Lukey, G.C. (2002). The effect of composition and temperature on the properties of fly ash and kaolinite based geopolymers. Chemical Engineering Journal. Vol 89, pp 63-73. Neville, A.M. (1995). Properties of Concrete. Essex: Longman. ACI Committee 201. (1989). Guide to durable concrete. American Concrete Institute. Concrete Institute of Australia. (2001). Performance criteria of concrete in marine environments. Recommended Practice. Crow Nest: CIA. Hearn, N., Hooton, R.D. & Nokken, M. R. (2006). Pore structure, permeability, and penetration resistance characteristics of concrete. Significance of tests and properties of concrete & concrete-making materials. Lamond, J.F. & Pielert, J.H. (eds). ASTM STP 169D. Hardjito, D. (2005). Development and properties of low calcium fly ash based geopolymer concrete. PhD Thesis of Civil Engineering & Computing Department. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. Hall, C. (1989). Water sorptivity of mortars and concretes: a review. Magazine of Concrete Research. Vol 41, pp 51-61. Sagoe-Krentsil, K. & Brown, T. (2006). Some key materials and process parameters governing the geopolymer binder performance. Proceeding of International Pozzolan, Concrete and Geopolymer. Khon Khaen, Thailand, May 24-25 2006. Panias, D., Giannopoulous, I.P. & Perraki, T. (2007). Effect of synthesis parameters on the mechanical properties of fly ash-based geopolymers. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects. Vol 301, pp 246-254. British Standards Institution. (1983). BS 1881: Part 122: 1983. Method for determination of water absorption. BSI. Andrew-Phaedonos, F. (1997). Recommended durability classifications for structural concrete based on the measurement of Volume of Permeable Voids (VPV). Fourth CANMET/ACI International Conference of Durability of Concrete, Sydney, Australia. CANMET/ACI. Supplementary papers. Ho, D.W.S., Chua, C.W. & Tam, C.T. (2003). Steam-cured concrete incorporating mineral admixtures. Cement & Concrete Research. Vol 33, pp 595-601. Rendell, F., Jauberthie, R. & Grantham, M. (2002). Deteriorated concrete: Inspection and physicochemical analysis. London: Thomas Telford. Sindhunata (2006). A conceptual model of geopolymerisation. PhD Thesis of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering Department. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.

391