EFFECT of NaOH CONCENTRATION

on STRENGTH of GGBS and BRHA BASED

GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE
Gokulanathan V1, PrasannaVenkatesan R2, Pazhani K.C.3.
College of Engineering, Guindy.
Department of Civil Engineering, Anna University, Chennai 600025, INDIA.
1

Email: gokulcivilions@gmail.com,
2

Email: prasmyth@gmail.com

Email: kcpazhani@annauniv.edu

ABSTRACT
This paper presents the compressive strength of
geopolymer concrete made from ground granulated
blast furnace slag (GGBS) and black rice husk
ash(BRHA). A mixture of Sodium Hydroxide
(NaOH) and Sodium Silicate (Na 2SiO3) solutions
was used as the alkaline activator solution. The
experiments were conducted for varying molar
concentrations of sodium hydroxide such as 5M, 8M
and 11M and with black rice husk ash being
replaced at 10%, 20% and 30% of the total binder
content. Compressive strength test was carried out
on 150mm cube specimens at the age of 3, 7 and 28
days. The test results revealed that, as the
concentration of sodium hydroxide solution
increases, the compressive strength of geo-polymer
concrete also increases. The average strength is
approximately same for both 0% and 10%
replacement of BRHA. The average strength of
20% replacement BRHA is decreased nearly 1.1
times when compared to the 0% and 10%
replacement of BRHA. The average strength of
30% replacement BRHA is decreased nearly 1.5
times when compared to 0% and 10% replacement
of BRHA.
KEYWORDS: Scanning electron microscope (SEM)
Black Rice Husk ash (BRHA), Ground Granulated
Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS), Sodium Hydroxide
(NaOH), Sodium Silicate (Na2SiO3), Geopolymer
concrete (GPC).

I.INTRODUCTION
As a result of booming infrastructural development
around the world, the demand for cement production is
also increased. Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is

mainly used as a cementitious material for the concrete

production. Nowadays, concrete industry is known to
be the major consumer of natural resources, such as
water, sand and aggregates, and manufacturing
Portland cement also requires large amounts of each of
them. As a result, the energy consumption for the
cement production is high. It is estimated that the
production of cement will increase from 1.5 billion
tons in 1995 to 2.2 billion tons in 2010 [8]. For
manufacturing each tone of the Portland cement about
1.5 tons of raw materials is needed [9]. The production
of 1 tone ordinary Portland cement consumes 4GJ
energy and produces about 1 tone of carbon dioxide
(CO2) to the atmosphere [10] which leads to
environmental pollution. To reduce the environmental
pollution and excess embodied energy utilization, the
alternative solution is Geo-polymer concrete.
The term geo-polymer was first coined by
Davidovits in 1978 to describe a family of mineral
binders with chemical composition similar to zeolites
but with an amorphous microstructure [5]. Unlike
ordinary Portland/pozzolanic cements, geo-polymers
do not form calcium- silicate-hydrates (CSHs) gel for
matrix formation and strength, but utilize the polycondensation reaction of silica and alumina precursors
to attain structural strength. Two main constituents of
geo-polymers are: source materials and alkaline
liquids. The source materials should be rich in silicon
(Si) and aluminium (Al). These could be natural
minerals such as kaolinite, clays, etc. Alternatively, byproduct materials such as fly ash, silica fume, slag,
rice-husk ash, red mud, etc could be used as source
materials. The alkaline liquids are from soluble alkali
metals that are usually sodium or potassium based. The
most common alkaline liquid used in geo-

polymerization is a combination of sodium hydroxide

(NaOH) or potassium hydroxide (KOH) and sodium
silicate or potassium silicate. Till now most of the
research has been conducted on flyash based
geopolymer and in this study, industrial wastes such as
ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and agro
waste as black rice husk ash (BRHA) are used as a
source materials to prepare geopolymer concrete.

II.EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
A. Materials used

2. Black Rice Husk Ash (BRHA)

Black rice husk ash (BRHA) is a by-product
from the burning of rice husk. The rice husk ash is a
highly siliceous material that can be used as an
admixture in concrete if the rice husk is burnt in a
specific manner. The available Rice husk ash is black
in colour as it contains unburnt carbon. Chemical
composition of black Rice husk ash is shown in Table
2. From Table 2. silica contributes about 94% of the
BRHA.
Table 2: Chemical composition of BRHA

The materials used in this study are GGBS,

BRHA, fine and coarse aggregates, alkaline solution,
super plasticizer and water.

1. Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag

(GGBS)
Geopolymer concrete is produced by
activating alumino-silicate based source material with
an alkaline solution. Ground granulated blast furnace
slags are used as one of the source material for
geopolymer binder. GGBS was obtained from JSW
cements limited. Bellari, Karnataka. It was given to
SGS India Pvt. Ltd. Laboratory, Ambattur, chennai for
testing. Table 1. shows the Chemical composition of
GGBS.
Table 1: Chemical Composition of GGBS
S.No
Chemical Composition
Percentage
Al2O3
1
14.06
Fe2O3
2
2.80
CaO
3
33.75
MgO
4
7.03
K2O
5
0.69
Na2O
6
0.41
SiO2
7
31.25

S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Chemical Composition
Al2O3
Fe2O3
CaO
MgO
K2O
Na2O
SiO2

Percentage
0.56
0.43
0.55
0.40
0.66
0.06
93.96

300m

100m

50m

10m

Fig 2. SEM images of BRHA

3. Alkaline activator solution

300m

50m

100m

10m

Fig 1. SEM images of GGBS

A combination of sodium hydroxide solution

(NaOH) and sodium silicate solution (Na2SiO3) was
used as an alkaline activator solution. The sodium
hydroxide solution was prepared by dissolving the
sodium hydroxide solids, in the form of pellets in
distilled water.In order to avoid the effect of unknown
contaminants in the mixing water, the sodium
hydroxide pellets were dissolved in distilled water.
In this study, the molar concentrations of
NaOH used are 5M, 8M and 11M. Since the molecular
weight of Sodium Hydroxide is 40g, and in order to
prepare 5M solution 5 x 40= 200 gms of Sodium
Hydroxide was dissolved in 1000 ml of distilled water.
The sodium silicate solution contained Na2O =14.7%,

SiO2 = 29.4%, and 55.6% of water, by mass. The

activator solution was prepared at least one day prior to
its use.

4. Aggregates
Granite type coarse aggregates was passed
through 20mm sieve and meets gradation
requirementsof IS 2386 -1963. Fine aggregate of
natural river sand taken from a local supplier are used
in the present study and they have the properties as
given in Table3. Its gradation meets zone ii of IS 383 1970 requirements.
Table 3. Properties of aggregates
Coarse
S.No

Property

aggregate

Sand

20mm
1

Fineness modulus

8.14

3.45

Specific gravity

2.87

2.6

1533.33

1254

Bulk
density(Kg/m3)

5. Super plasticizer
High-range water-reducing naphthalene based
super plasticizer was added to the mixture to improve
the workability of fresh concrete.

6. Water
Extra water nearly 10% of binder is added to
increase the workability of the concrete.

B. Mix proportions
In this study, mix design procedure was
chosen from the literature by Djwantoro Hardjito, et al
(2004), showed that the aggregates occupythe largest
volume, (about 75-80 % by mass) in GPCs.The total
volume occupied by the aggregates (Coarse and fine
aggregates) is assumed to be 77%. The alkaline liquid
to GGBS ratio is taken as 0.40, Unit weight of
geopolymer concrete is 2400 kg/m3, sodium silicate to
sodium hydroxide is 2.5 [4].The details of mix
proportions are given in Table 4. In this study
conventional concrete is 100% GGBS. Three levels of
sodium hydroxide concentration i.e. 5 M, 8 M and
11 M were used.

Table 4. Details of mix proportions

Mix

% replacement

GGBS

BRHA

F.A

C.A

NaOH

Na2SiO3

Sp

of RHA

Kg/m

GC 1
5M

394

647

1201

45

113

10

355

39

647

1201

45

113

20

315

79

647

1201

45

113

30

276

118

647

1201

45

113

394

647

1201

45

113

10

355

39

647

1201

45

113

20

315

79

647

1201

45

113

30

276

118

647

1201

45

113

394

647

1201

45

113

10

355

39

647

1201

45

113

20

315

79

647

1201

45

113

30

276

118

647

1201

45

113

GC 2
8M

GC 3
11M

C.Mixing, casting and curing of GPC

1. Mixing and casting
The alkaline activator used for the experiment
was a mixture of Sodium hydroxide and Sodium
silicate solutions. These solutions were prepared 24
hours before the mixing of concrete [4].
The aggregates, GGBS and BRHA were
mixed together and the prepared alkaline solution was
added to the dry mix and thoroughly mixed.The super
plasticizer along with extra water was then added to the
mix to improve the workability of concrete.
The geopolymer concrete was placed in 150
mm cube moulds in three layers and each layer was
compacted by giving 25 blows with a 25mm tamping
rod.

Material collection

Addition of NaOH solution

Mixing of all ingredients

GGBS cube specimen

2. Curing
The geopolymer concrete specimens were
then placed in a hot air oven at a temperature of 60 0C
for 48 hours. And then the specimens were taken
outand cured under room temperature till the time of
testing.

BRHA cube specimen

Fig 3. Process of cube casting

D. Compressive Strength Test

The cube specimens were tested in a
compressive testing machine having 2000KN capacity
in accordance with the Bureau of IS 516-1959
procedures. The compression test results are tabulated
in Table 5.
Table 5. Average Compressive Strength Results
S.NO

Molarity

% replacement of BRHA

5M

8M

11M

Average compressive strength MPa

3 Day

7 Day

28 Day

56.23

60.5

62.7

10

56.2

61.0

62.95

20

51.4

55.2

57.3

30

37.2

40.7

42.0

61.9

66.5

69.2

10

62.0

66.9

68.86

20

56.7

61.2

62.9

30

41.33

44.8

46.0

66.96

72.2

74.86

10

67

71.96

74.9

20

61.1

65.03

68.1

30

44.5

47.5

50.3

Average Compressive strength in MPa

1II.

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

1.
3 Days
2.
7 Days
28 Days
5M

8M

3.

11M
4.

Figure 4: compressive strength of geopolymer

concrete with different molar concentration of
sodium hydroxide (NaOH)

5.

Average compressive strength MPa

Molar Concentration

70

6.

60
50
3 days

40
30

7.

7 days

20
10

28 days

IV.

Average compressive strength ( MPa)

0% BRHA

The strength characteristic of geopolymer concrete

depends on the molar concentration of sodium
hydroxide (NaOH). The compressive strength of
geopolymer concrete increased with increase in
molar concentration of NaOH because leaching
action of silicon and aluminium from the source
materials get increased with higher concentration
of NaOH results in higher compressive strength of
geopolymer concrete.

2.

The compressive strength of GGBS and BRHA

based geopolymer concrete is higher when
compare to fly ash based geopolymer concrete of
8M concentration ( NaOH) solution [2].

3.

The replacement of BRHA in GGBS based

geopolymer concrete is significant only in 10% of
BRHA and quick setting has occurred if the
percentage of BRHA content increases.

4.

The ease availability of rice husk ash type is black

rice husk ash (BRHA). Further experiments are
needed to increase the strength and setting time of
GGBS and BRHA based geopolymer concrete.

10% BRHA
20% BRHA
30% BRHA
7

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Figure 5: compressive strength of geopolymer

concrete with different percentage replacement of
black rice husk ash (BRHA)

The
average
compressive
strength
is
approximately same for both conventional and
10% replacement of BRHA.( fig 6)
The average compressive strength of concrete with
20% replacement BRHA is decreased nearly 1.1
times when compared to the conventional and 10%
replacement of BRHA.
The average compressive strength of 30%
replacement BRHA is decreased nearly 1.5 times
when compared to conventional and 10%
replacement of BRHA.
Due to the presence of high silica content in black
Rice Husk Ash (BRHA) there is a fast chemical
reaction occurred resulting quick setting of
geopolymer concrete.
The average compressive strength increased
approximately 10 to 12% when there is increase in
molar concentration of NaOH solution between
5M and 8M.
Compressive strength of geopolymer concrete
decreased with increase in percentage replacement
of BRHA. ( fig 5)
Compressive strength of geopolymer concrete
increased with increase in molar concentration
from 5,8 and 11M. ( fig 4)

In this study, it can be concluded that:

0
10
20
30
% Replacement of BRHA

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

28

Days

Figure 6: compressive strength of geopolymer

concrete with different curing time

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and for most, thank to god for giving me
a life. I am deeply indebted to my project guide, for her
guidance, encouragement and stimulating suggestions
which enabled me to carry out this project work
successfully. Thanks also to the technician of Concrete
Laboratory, which help to me on doing my research
from mixing the concrete until the testing of the
concrete. Finally I would like to thank my parents and
friends for their encouragement and unending support.

REFERENCES
[1] Alireza NajiGivi, Suraya Abdul Rashid, Farah
Nora A. Aziz, Mohamad Amran Mohd Salleh,
(2010), Assessment of the effects of rice husk ash
particle size on strength, water permeability and
workability of binary blended concrete,
Construction and Building Materials., Vol. 24,
Issue 11, pp.2145-2150.
[2] Bhosale, M.A , Shinde, N.N (2012), Geopolymer
concrete by using fly ash in construction, IOSR
Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering.,
Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp.25-30.
[3] Detphan.
S,
and
Chindaprasirt,
P
(2009), Preparation of fly ash and rice husk ash
geopolymer International Journal of Minerals,
Metallurgy and Materials.,Vol. 16, Issue 6, pp.
720-726.
[4] Hardjito,
D.
and
Rangan,
B.
V.
(2005),Development and Properties of Low
Calcium Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Concrete,
Research Report GC 1, Faculty of Engineering,
Curtin University of Technology.
[5] Joseph Davidovits, (1994), Development of Very
Early High Strength Cement, Journal of Materials
Education, Vol. 16, pp. 91-139.
[6] Joseph Davidovits, (1994), Global Warming
Impact on the Cement and Aggregates Industries,
World Resource Review, Vol. 8, No.2, pp. 263278.
[7] Kartini, K, Mahmud, H.B, Hamidah, M.S, (2006),
Strength Properties of Grade 30 Rice Husk Ash
Concrete 31st Conference on Our World in
Concrete & Structures.
[8] Malhotra, V. M. (1999), Making Concrete
"Greener" With Fly Ash. ACI Concrete
International, pp. 61-66
[9] McCaffery, R. (2002), Climate Change and the
Cement Industry, Global Cement and Lime
Magazine ( Environment Special Issue), pp. 15-19.

[10] Mehta, P. K., (2001) Reducing the

Environmental Impact of Concrete, ACI
Concrete International, Vol 23 (10): pp. 61-66.
[11] Mohd Mustafa Al Bakri, Mohammed H,
Kamarudin H, Khairul Niza I and Zarina Y.
(2011), Review on fly ash-based geopolymer
concrete without Portland Cement Journal of
Engineering and Technology Research Vol. 3(1),
pp. 1-4.
[12] Zhang, M.H. and Mohan, M.V. (1996). High
Performance Concrete Incorporating Rice Husk
Ash as a Supplementary Cementing Material.
ACI Materials Journal. Vol. 93(6): pp. 629-636.