ABSTARCT

Concrete is the most predominantly used construction material in the world.

The principal ingredient of concrete, Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is unfortunately
found to be associated with some adverse effects. At the same time, a lot of industrial and
agro wastes with inherent cementitious properties are produced abundantly but mostly
dumped into landfills. Employing such by-products as alternates for cement has multiple
benefits including conservation of environment, sustainability of resources and solving the
disposal problem of by-products. One such promising alternative is Geopolymer
Concrete (GPC) which completely eliminates OPC in its production.

The source materials of geopolymer could be of geological origin like met

kaolin or by-product materials like fly ash, Ground Granulated Blast furnace Slag
(GGBS), silica fume, Phosphogypsum etc. The alkaline liquid used is a combination of
sodium or potassium hydroxide along with sodium or potassium silicate correspondingly.
GPC is proven to have superior strength and durability over conventional concrete.

Most of the research works related to GPC have been made on fly ash based
Geopolymers. In this present study, industrial waste which is GGBS and Phosphogypsum
were used as source materials for GPC. The tested scientific results of this investigation
may provide useful data on the strength and durability of geopolymer concrete that has
been developed from GGBS and Phosphogypsum, which are essentially industrial by-
products. It will also help in changing the perception of conventional concrete and also a
broader recognition of this material in practical applications.

The objective of the present study was to develop geopolymer concrete mixtures using
GGBS and Phosphogypsum. This investigation utilized Flyash as the base material for
making the control geopolymer concrete. Then Phosphogypsum and GGBS was used to
replace to Fly ash in the mix in four different proportions, 2.5,5,7.5,10% these specimens
were placed in oven at the temperature 60 oC for 24 hours and specimens are placed in 5%
concentrated solution of HCl and MgSO 4 for 30,60,90 days and measure the strength and
durability properties of the specimens.

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract
Table of contents

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

1.1General 1

1.1 Present scenario of fly ash in India 2

1.2.1 Hazards due to disposal of fly ash 2

1.3 Need of the present investigation 3

1.3.1 Introduction 3

1.3.2 Global Warming Impact 3

1.3.3 The basic needs for Concrete and Cement in developing countries 4

1.3.4 Minor Reduction of CO2 Emissions with Blended Cements 5

1.3.4.1. Concrete as a sink for CO2 5

1.3.4.2. Blending of Portland cement 6

1.3.4.3. Natural pozzolans 6

1.3.4.4. Coal Flyash 6

1.3.4.5. The Need for Novel Low-CO2 Cements for the Aggregates Industries 7

1.4 Geopolymer Cements 7

1.5 Comparison between Portland and Geopolymer Cementitious Systems 8

1.5.1 The Position of the Portland cement Industry 8

2
1.6 Concrete without OPC-is it possible? 9

1.7 Geopolymer concrete 11

1.8 Constituents of geopolymer concrete 12

1.8.1 Alkaline liquid 12

1.8.2 Mineral admixtures 13

1.9 Curing of geopolymer concrete 13

1.10 Objectives the present study 13

1.11 Scope of the investigation 14

CHAPTER II : LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 General 15

2.2 Concrete and Environment 15

2.3 Flyash 16

2.4 Geo polymer concrete 16

2.5 Structural application of geo polymer concrete 18

2.6 Durability of geopolymer concrete 19

2.6.1 Acid attack 19

2.6.2 Sulphate attack 21

2.6.3 Alkaline liquids 23

2.6.4 Composition of GGBS 23

2.6.5 GGBS in concrete 24

3
2.7 Studies on Phosphogypsum 24

CHAPTER 111: MATERIAL AND EXPERIMENTAL INFORMATION

3.1 General 27

3.1.1 Fly ash 27

3.1.2 Phosphogypsum 29

3.1.3 Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag 30

3.1.4 Sodium hydroxide 31

3.1.5 Sodium silicate 33

3.1.6 Water 34

3.1.7 Hydrochloric acid (HCL) 35

3.1.8 Magnesium sulfate (Mgso4) 35

3.1.9 Super plasticizer 36

3.2 Methodology

3.2.1 Preparation of alkaline liquid 37

3.2.2 Mixing 37

3.2.3 Casting of Geopolymer concrete specimens 38

3.2.4 Curing of Geopolymer concrete specimens 39

3.2.5 Placing of specimens under acidic environment 41

4
3.3 Preliminary tests

3.3.1.1 Bulking of sand 42

3.3.1.2 Sieve analysis fine aggregate 43

3.3.1.3 Specific gravity of fine aggregate 45

3.3.2 Preliminary test on coarse aggregate

3.3.2.1 Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate 46

3.3.2.2 Specific gravity of coarse aggregate 47

3.3.2.3 Preliminary tests on GPC 49

3.4 Tests conducted 49

3.4.1 Compressive strength test 49

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Workability 51

4.2.1 Slump test 51

4.3 Test setup and testing of Hardened concrete 54

4.3.1 Cube compressive strength test 54

4.3.2 Water absorption of Geopolymer concrete 56

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS

5
5.1Conclusions 64
5.2Suggestions for future work 65
APPENDIX 66
References 70

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
3.1 Composition of Fly Ash

3.2 Physical properties of Sodium hydroxide

3.3 Chemical properties of Sodium hydroxide

3.4 Chemical and Physical properties of Sodium silicate25

3.5 Bulking of sand

3.6 Sieve analysis of fine aggregate

3.7 Sieve analysis test results of coarse aggregate (20mm)

3.8 sieve analysis test results of coarse aggregate (10mm)

3.9Preliminary test results of concrete

4.1 Slump values obtained for each Concrete Mix

4.2 Compaction Factor values obtained for each Concrete Mix
4.3 Vee-bee time values obtained for each mix
4.4 Cube Compressive Strength values after immersion in
hcl solution ggbs replacement specimens
4.5 Weight losses % ggbs replaced GPC on exposure to HCL
4.6 Cube Compressive Strength values after immersion in hcl solution
Phosphogypsum replacement specimens
4.7 Weight losses of Phosphogypsum replaced GPC on exposure to HCl
4.8 Cube Compressive Strength values after immersion in MgSO4
Solution ggbs replacement specimens
4.9 Weight losses ggbs replaced of GPC on exposure to MGSO4 solution

4.10 Cube Compressive Strength values after immersion in MgSo4

Solutions Phosphogypsum replacement specimens

4.11Weight losses of Phosphogypsum replaced GPC on exposure to MGSO4.

6
 LIST OG FIGURES
3.1 flyash and aggregates
3.2 specimens of ggbs and Phosphogypsum

3.3 Sodium hydroxide pellets

3.4 sodium silicate sample solution sample

7
3.5 preparation of the mix

3.6 casted cube specimens

3.7 Air dried and oven cured specimens

3.8 Casted specimens placed in 5% concentrated MgSO4 solution

3.9 casted specimens placed in 5% concentrated HCL solution

3.10 Testing of specimen under compression testing machine

4.1 Different types of Slumps

4.2 % replacement ggbs& Phosphogypsum V/S Slump

4.3 compaction factor apparatus and testing

4.4 % of replacement GGBS & Phosphogypsum V/S compaction factor42

4.5 Apparatus of Vee-Bee test

4.6 %of replacement ggbs& Phosphogypsum/S Vee-Bee time
4.7 Apparatus of Compressive strength test
4.8 ggbs specimens in Hcl solution

4.9 weight loss of GGBS specimens in HCL solution

4.10 Compressive strength of Phosphogypsum specimens in HCL solution

4.11 weight loss of Phosphogypsum specimens in HCL solution

4.12 Compressive strength of GGBS specimens in MgSO4 solution

4.13 weight loss of GGBS specimens in MgSO4 solution

4.14 Compressive strength of Phosphogypsum specimens in MgSO4 solution

4.15 weight loss of Phosphogypsum specimens in MgSO4 solution