CHAPTER 1

INTRODUTION
1.1 GENERAL

Construction in the present decade is growing very rapidly. Hence the universal
concrete is the second most adversely material next to the water. Demand of the cement
and concrete intensifications as building the increases, so the claim of ordinary Portland
cement also increases. The most used material is Portland cement which is the product
used in production of concrete matrix. The yearly manufacturing of cement is at the
order of 1.8B tons and in that about 3 billion tons of natural resources from environment
per year required for the production of the product cement and because of this about 1
ton of carbon dioxide is liberated to the environment. Global warming is one of the
main environmental affecting factor which is caused due to the emission of greenhouse
gases into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is the major source for the Green house
effect which is liberated from vehicles and by human activities. 65% of global warming
is by carbon dioxide among all the greenhouse gases. The cement industries is also one
of the responsible bearing batch for the emission of carbon dioxide i.e., 1 tonne of
carbon dioxide is liberated to the atmosphere in generation of 1 ton of Portland cement.

Many researches are now a days being conducted to supplement the use of
Portland cement in concrete.In order to reduce the global warming issues the utilisation
and use of the other cementing materials such as Fly ash, silica fume, Ground
granulated blast furnace slag, rice husk, mettakilne etc. are developed and using as
alternative binders to the Portland cement.

The geo polymer concrete technology was introduced by DAVIDOVITS as an

alternative material for cement which in turn affects for Portland cement industries.
These new binding materials which are used as an alternative materials is to blended
in cement and concrete are obtained by the alkaline activation or geo polymerisation
of different industrial products. The alternative materials which substitues as a new
binder to the blended cement and concrete are got through alkaline activation of
different products .
 The term “Geo polymer” first entered in 1978 to describe a new family of
mineral binder at higher range of alkaline environment. It is produced from organic
material and chemicals. These geo polymer prepared from the fly ash which is
cementitious like inert material and also the alkaline solution which is to be added that
includes sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide.

So inorder to improve the performance of the concrete and to improve the

mechanical performance of geo polymer concrete one of the best method is to add the
replacement material i.e., GGBFS (ground granulated blast furnace slag) and the hybrid
fibres in concrete. The term hybrid fibres refers that the drawback of one fibre is
replaced by the other one. Adding of these GGBFS and fibres will restrict the
development of crack, also it is very known for the increase in fracture ,toughness
provided by fibre bridging on the main crack plane prior to crack extension. The glass
fibre and steel fibres are used in this experiment to study the mechanical properties of
geo polymer concrete. The 3Ds steel fibres used are of diameter 0.5mm and length is
200mm and aspect ratio 40. These fibres are applied in the 2 % . GGBS is replaced with
the total fly ash weight by 20%, 40%,60% and 80%.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY.

The objectives of the present investigation are:

1. Preparation of the geopolymer concrete by using low calcium fly ash with
100% replacement of cement.
2. Studying the variation of compressive, flexural and split tensile strength of geo
polymer concrete by varying the GGBFS %.
3. To study the results of compressive strength, split tensile and flexural strength
of geo polymer concrete by addition of the combination of fibers i.e., hybrid
fibres.
4. To compare the experimental results with the fly ash based geo polymer
concrete and the inter comparison between the results obtained for different %
of replacement of GGBFS.
5. To compare the experimental results of geo polymer concrete with 3DS Steel
fiber and glass fibre concrete .
6. To Compare the overall result of GPC with GGBFS and hybrid fibers with the
GPC with GGBFS and without hybrid fibers.
1.3 SCOPE OF THE WORK.
1. The detailed experimental work has conducted to attain the strength of fly ash
based geo polymer concrete at temperature of 60 C for 24 hrs curing.
2. In this experiment work only source of dry low calcium fly ash (class F ) from
the Raichur Thermal Power Station ( RTPS) is used.
3. GGBS is obtained from the Jindal Steel Work product suplliers.
4. Sodium hydroxide pellets and sodium silicate solution was procured from
local vendors commercially.
5. Fiber admixture like steel and glass fibers are introduced in the concrete.
6. To prepare the concrete which is environmental friendly and to minimize the
global warming effect.
7. Preparation and test of compressive strength , split tensile strength and flexural
strength of geo polymer with partial replacement of GGBFS and addition of
hybrid fibers.
CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE.

2.1 RIVIEW OF LITERATURE.

The geo polymer is like a ocean which has a wide range of research
literature exist in with respect to the mechanical properties like compressive, split
tensile and flexural strength behaviour by addition of certain replacement material
and by adding different proportion of GGBS and hybrid fibres. The literature
reviewed with respect to different area with respect to the basement for my work is
briefly highlighted.

2.2.1 RECENT WORKS DONE IN GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE.

1. Vijaya Rangan B , May 2008

He is the one who has did and still conductin many researches on geo
polymer concrete. He studied the efficient advantages of low calcium fly ash based
geo polymer concrete with respect to the environmental friendly concept. He also
undergone with the constituents to be used in the preparation of Geo polymer
concrete. After the study and result data they came to an conclusion that it geo
polymer concrete require a basic method of design for preparation of geo polymer
concrete. They have clearly explained the mix design method by taking one
example. They also mentioned in a realistic way about the mix design required for
the specific grade. Though we have separate code of practise for mix design of
concrete , it cannot be used for the preparation of the geo polymer concrete. The
basic concept of mix design remains same , apart from that water to geo polymer
solids ratio, molarity concentration plays a major role in the strength gaining factor.
Hence with the only reference of Vijaya Rangan the research works are conducting.
They also tested the mix of concrete to test for the variation of strength effect of age
and after it is cured in the oven for 24hrs at 60 C. The result tabulated by them
shows no more variation of compressive strength. The strength increased around
10-20% compared to the 7 days. And also they gave the comparison of the result
with the specimens placed directly to the sun rays and the specimens placed in the
sun shade. In that the maximum is gained by the specimens which are in ambient
curing kept at the direct sun rays.
2. Susan Bernal etal., Sep 2009

The main intention of them is to obtain the test result for the development
of fracture and toughness by incorporating the steel fiber. They also undergone with
the study of the durability properties like porosity and capillary suction which were
also noted and concluded . Finally they came to know that the compressive strength
was decreasing with the increase of percentage of addition of fiber .But at the same
time the split tensile and flexural strength test results were were found to be
increased. The experiment conducted says that as the steel fiber increases the
compression, split tensile and flexural strength increases till a range of volume
fraction and then geo polymer strength goes on decreases in the strength . Not only
in matter of the mechanical properties of the concrete, the durability parameters like
acid attack, abrasion test, corrosion test, water absorption was improved by the
addition of the fibers.

3. Vijayi, kumutha and Vishnuram , Sep 2011

These people studied and reviewed the compressive strength, split tensile
strength and flexural strength properties of geo polymer concrete with replacement
of the fly ash, i.e., 90% of fly ash and 10 % of ordinary Portland cement with
alkaline solution and addition of the steel fiber. They used the combination of the
replacement material and added different volume fraction of 0.25%, 0.5% and
0.75%. Therefore the result with the steel fibres increase the compressive strength
, split tensile strength and flexural strength. They found that as the volume fraction
of steel fiber increases the mechanical properties of geo polymer concrete also
increases. They also concluded that the delay in setting time and heat curing is
necessary for the better result. Then they also observed decrease in the setting time
by addition of 10% of ordinary Portland cement. The density of geopolymer
concrete composites were found to be increasing in a small range as the age of the
concrete increases.
4. Gokulram and Anuradha , March 2013

The main aim of this persons was to study the case with an experimental
investigation and to figure out the mechanical properties when polypropylene fibres
were added as one of the admixture. The properties change in the Geo – Polymer
concrete is noted down and they also continued the work with two different
experiments. In that one with replacement of cement with fly ash and GGBS and
another mix matrix consists replacement of natural sand by manufactured
sand.They cured the specimens for 24 hrs in hot air oven and remaining days kept
out for ambient curing.

After conducting study they came to a conclusion that the setting time of
Geo-polymer concrete was observed more time in polypropylene fibre reinforced
concrete than in the Geo-polymer concrete without any fibers. Apart from that in
the point of density Geo-polymer concrete and conventional concrete with cement
are same. In the final conclusion they detailed that compressive strength of ambient
cured reinforced geo-polymer concrete with polypropylene fibers depends on ageof
the concrete but hot air oven cured concrete doesn’t depends on age. Finally they
conclude that the usage of geo polymer concrete with polypropylene fibers is
environmental friendly and also gets rid of the problem of shrinkage and high
brittleness.

5. Atteshamuddin, Sayyad, Subhash and Patnakar , Nov 2013

In this investigation they did the study of the impact of steel fibers on geo
polymer concrete after setting. i.e., in the hardened state with their mechanical
properties with fibers . They have taken the alkaline solution to fly ash ratio as 3.5
and added steel fibers in the concrete. They have not normal steel fibers, instead of
normal steel fibers they used crimped steel fiber. The length to diameter ratio of the
steel fiber was found to be 50 . i.e., aspect ratio is 50. The steel fibers taken in this
experimental were taken in the volume fraction of 0.5 % and the interval is %, 0.5
% and 1%. They concluded that the density of the GPC increases with the increase
in the steel fibers in both the cases .i.e., wet as well as in dry state and the
workability of geopolymer concrete decreases as the increase in the fiber admixture
increases. They finally gave the result that the optimum dosage of steel fiber was
0.2% where all the mechanical properties like compressive strength, split tensile
and flexural strength are maximum.
6. Eswaramoorthi and Arun kumar , Feb 2014

They did the experimental study to investigate the concrete performance

using low calcium fly ash and in that they have avoided high calcium fly ash to
reduce the carbon dioxide emission which in turn reduces the green house effect. In
this study they make use of the one of the cheapest polymer fiber called
polypropylene fibers in the mix. The main intention of adding polypropylene fiber
is to resist the chemical attack and to lock out the crack development and to improve
out the tensile strength of GPC concrete .After casting is completed and then the
cubes were tested at different during period and for different mechanical properties.
They concluded that the compressive strength of geo polymer concrete with and
without the polymer fibers both have improved the strength by around 10%
whereas the split tensile strength of geo polymer concrete has given a good result
with increase in strength upto 13%.

They also pointed out that it gives a better compressive strength hence it is
suitable for structural application. Finally they gave a conclusion that by using geo
polymer concrete consumption of cement, carbon dioxide emission and greenhouse
effect was reduced to some extent

7. Maria Rajesh, Feb 2014

They carried out the experiment with addition of steel fiber. They involved
in the study to investigate the different properties of geo polymer concrete with
GGBFS and steel fiber addition. They have given the optimum value in this study
and that optimum value for compressive strength , split tensile strength and flexural
strength after 28 days as more in 40% replacement of fly ash by GGBFS. They
conlcuded that the geopolymer concrete is more environmental friendly and these
geo polymer can easily replace the conventional concrete in which cement is the
main binding material. Addition of steel fibers and also produces good strength.
They also made the report that the steel fibers added in the geopolymer concrete
will also increase the durability of geo polymer concrete.
8. Mourougane, K.U.Muthu etal

They did the study after the arrival of mix proportioning method for the
production of geo polymer concrete through experimental investigation. They also
conducted the durability characteristics with respect to the acid resistance, sulphate
attack and corrosion resistance. After casting , oven curing and tresting they came
to a conclusion that the strength of geo polymer concrete strength after one day of
casting gave a range of result from 60Mpa to 80Mpa with the different alkaline
liquid ration and by adding 10% of GGBS instead of fly ash. It showed higher
compressive strength than the complete fly ash based GPC concrete.

Their investigation also shows that the better resistance to sulphate attack
compared to coventional concrete. They also clinched that the geo polymer shows
a good potential against the durability and strength parameters. These can be used
for application of precast industry because it establishes a high compressive strength
to the precast units.

9. Vijaya Rangan, Djwantoro Hardjito etal

They have conducted the experimental work and investigated with the mix
proportion to be added to produce the matrix, the process of manufacturing and the
characteristics of fresh and hardened state concrete. They also explored the various
parameters like utilisation of the material in structural member and long term
behaviour of the concrete. They finally concluded in two ways. It is one of the
monetary benefits for durability and mechanical properties. The cost of fly ash is of
lower rate and that to only for transportation but for the cement the cost is high in
geo polymer concrete.

They had used the alkaline liquid activator solution .Geo polymer concrete
is going to be 10 to 30 % cheaper than the conventional concrete mix. They also
concluded that geo polymer concrete is having admirable compressive strength and
structural application. They also studied the elastic properties, behaviour and
strength of the reinforced structural member which were similar to those of Portland
cement concrete. They investigated and obtained the results on durability and
concluded that it was having excellent resistance to sulphate attack and low creep
but it was having one drawback regarding dry shrinkage.
 By the study of above literature review, we can conclude that the mix design,
alkaline liquid to fly ash ratio, water to geo polymer solids ratio play an important
role in the geo polymer concrete and adding of fibers and GGBS will also give the
increased strength in the concrete. The heat curing is the most important for the geo
polymer concrete to gain the strength. The heat curing of 24hrs at 60 C is one of
the main criteria and addition of fibres not only increase the compressive strength
but it also increases the split tensile and flexural strength. They also concluded that
the geo polymer is having good durability properties and mechanical properties
when steel fiber and polypropylene admixture added to the geo polymer concrete.
CHAPTER- 3

METHODOLOGY.
The Geo polymer concrete preparation is quite risky job, because the use of the
alkaline solution is having high viscosity when compared to water. When it is mixed
with the dry mix the mixing becomes difficult. Apart from that the geo polymer
concrete mainly depends on the molarity concentration of the solution and geo polymer
solids to liquids ratio.

Once the mix design is done with the materials required for the project are collected
as per the quantity estimate. Later the hot air oven is arranged up. In our case we
yourself prepared a hot air oven of size 7 x 4 x 4 ft, so that more no: of specimens can
be kept inside the chamber for curing. The maximum temperature that the present oven
we did can be used upto 200 deg temperature.

Once the hot air oven is set up, the casting is done with the mix design calculated.
After the casting , specimens are placed in the chamber followed by demoulding of the
specimens after 24 hrs of casting. The specimens are set to cure for 24 hours at 60 deg
temperature. After it is cured it is kept for ambient curing and the tests are conducted
for 7, 14 and 28 days. The results are tabulated in the table and the corresponding graphs
are plotted and the results are compared.

Finally the conclusion is done with key parameters used and the changes after using
the key parameters are described .

The flow of work in this project is described as per the lists mentioned.

3.1 Material characteristics.

3.2 Constituents of Geo polymer concrete.
3.3 Importance of mix design.
3.4 Working of hot curing chamber.
3.5 Mix design for the M60 grade.
3.6 Tabulation of the result
3.7 Comparison with the key parameters and without key parameters.
3.8 Conclusion.
3.1 MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS.
To start with any project work the raw materials or materials required for the
project work are first collected and analysed. Analysis in the sense the availability
of the materials, cost of the materials, quality of the materials.

After getting arrangement of the aggregates, fly ash, GGBFS, sodium hydroxide
and sodium silicate etc their properties and qualities are to be first conducted and
studied.

3.2 CONSTITUENTS OF GEO POLYMER CONCRETE

USED IN THIS PROJECT
As like conventional concrete geo polymer do includes some basic materials
and also some more other. The constituents of geo polymer concrete are.

3.2.1 Low calcium dry fly ash

3.2.2 Ground Granulated Blast furnace slag (GGBFS)
3.2.3 Aggregates
20 mm size aggregates
12.5 mm size aggregates
6 mm size aggregates and fine aggregates
3.2.4 Alkaline solution (Sodium Hydroxide and Sodium Silicate)
3.2.5 Hybrid Fiber (Crimped steel fiber and Glass fiber)
3.2.6 Super plasticizer
3.2.7 Hot air oven
3.2.8 Water

3.2.1 FLY ASH:

Apart from the major component cement we are using fly ash in this project.
Fly ash used in this study is low calcium based fly ash ( ASTM Class F ) dry fly ash
got from Raichur thermal power plant which is under the Karnataka Power
Corporation Limited. Alumina silicate is the source of fly ash material used in the
synthesis of geo polymer binder. Fly ash is the inert material and it is the bi-product
which is the end product we obtained after the generation of power from the thermal
power plant. The chemical contents in this fly ash are obtained by conducting the
test. The test result gives the following percentage of chemicals in the fly ash.
3.2.1a PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH:

Table 3.1 : Properties of Fly ash

SL.NO Properties of Fly Ash Value

1 Specific Gravity of Fly ash 2.40
2 Fineness property 227.87 g/m2
3 Fineness modulus 5
4 Density of Fly ash 1026

One of the physical property of the Fly ash is its colour. It looks like light in
black color. It is more finer than the cement. It doesn’t feel cool when we put hands
into the as what we feel for cement.

Fig 3.1 : Fly ash

3.2.2 GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG .

GGBFS is also of the most replacing material for cement which is using in
construction field. Though it is an effective replacing material the optimum
replacement varies. In cement GGBFS replacement gives maximum strength for
upto 40 % of replacement. But GGBFS in geo polymer concrete is a special case
and need to conduct experiment and find out the best replacement %. Ground
granulated blast furnace slag is also the end product or bi-product obtained from the
STEEL manufacturing industry. It is also abbreviated as GGBFS throught in this
project. The manufacturing of GGBS involves the following stages shown in the
fig.
 Fig 3.2 : GGBFS

Fig 3.3 : Manufacturing process of GGBFS

The clinkers of the material after refining to get the steel is passed over the
hot furnace and it is make it into powder form and send to the large bins.

The properties of the GGBFS are mentioned in the below table.

One of the physical property of the GGBFS is its colour. It looks like almost whitish
in colour.
 Table 3.2 : Properties of GGBFS

SL.NO Property of GGBFS Value

1 Specific gravity of GGBFS 2.58
2 Fineness 202.7 g/m2
3 Fineness modulus 7
4 Density of GGBFS 2066 kg/m3

3.2.3 AGGREGATES:

One the major constituent in preparation of the concrete is aggregates.

Aggregates involves fine and coarse aggregates. Locally available aggregates were
used. The coarse aggregates size of 20mm, 12mm and 6mm and fine aggregates
passing through 4.75 mm are used in this project. The coarse aggregates were in
saturated surface dry condition and fine aggregates is dry.

Fig 3.3 : 20 mm aggregates Fig 3.4: 12.5 mm aggregates Fig 3.5: 6 mm aggregates

3.2.3a SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULT OF COARSE AGGREGATE.

The aggregates are taken from the batch and is used for the test. The
aggregates are defined whether it is fine or coarse or fine based on its size. The
aggregates size greater than the 4.75mm are called as coarse aggregates. The test is
conducted as per the Indian standard Sieve analysis test procedure.
Table 3.3 : Sieve analysis result for Coarse aggregate

Sieve Weight retained % weight retained Cumulative % weight % weight

size retained passing
20 20 1 1 99
12.5 450 22.5 23.5 76.5
10 150 7.5 31 69
6.3 470 23.5 54.5 45.5
4.75 660 33 87.5 12.5
pan 250 12.5 100 0

Fineness modulus of coarse aggregate is given by =

 F  500 =
180.5  500
= 6.8
100 100

3.2.3b PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COARSE AGGREGATE.

Table 3.4 : Properties of Coarse aggregate

SL.No Specific Fineness Flakiness Density kg/ m 3

gravity modulus index
Loose Rodded

1 2.523 6.8 28.4% 1228 1504

3.2.3c SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULT OF FINE AGGREGATE.

The aggregates which passes through the 4.75 mm sieve are called as fine
aggregates. In this study we used river sand obtained from the local vendor.

Fig 3.6: Fine aggregates

 Table 3.5: Sieve analysis result of Fine aggregate

Sieve Weight % weight Cumulative % weight % of

size retained retained retained passing

4.75 71.5 3.575 3.575 96.425

2.36 149.0 7.45 11.025 88.975

1.18 641.5 32.075 43.1 40.569

600  343.0 17.15 60.25 39.75

425  405.0 20.25 80.5 19.5

300  119.5 5.975 86.475 13.525

150  249.0 12.45 98.925 1.075

75  6.0 0.3 99.225 0.775

pan 3.2 gms 0.15 99.375 0

F 30000
Fineness modulus of fine aggregates is given by = = =3
100 100

3.2.3d PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF FINE AGGREGATE.

Table 3.6 : Properties of fine aggregates

Sl.No Specific Fineness Density kg/ m 3

gravity modulus
Loose Rodded

1 2.42 3 1350 1617

3.2.4 ALKALINE SOLUTION.
Alkaline solution is nothing but the combination of the Sodium hydroxide
and sodium Silicate. In geo polymer concrete the main binder is the alkaline
solution. The strength of the concrete depends on the Molarity of the alkaline
solution. Before mixing the alkaline solution to the dry mix the solution is to be
prepared before 24 hours. The reason behind is that the reaction to be complete in
between sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate. The chemicals are obtained from
the local chemical suppliers.

Fig 3.7 : Alkaline solution

3.2.5 HYBRID FIBERS

The term hybrid fibers refers that the combination of two individual fibers
where the negative property of one fiber is replaced by another fiber with the
positive result mutually. In this present study I am using combination of Crimped
steel fiber and Glass fiber.

i. 3DS STEEL FIBERS.

Fig 3.8 : 3Ds steel fiber Fig 3.9 : Glass fiber

 ii. GLASS FIBERS

Glass fiber is the one which is being incorporated into the concrete
which helps in improving mechanical properties of the concrete and it acts
as a anti crack agent for a certain level. It is used according to the ISO
9001:2000 to achieve the good results.

The product supplier anti- crack concrete solutions has given more details
of the product and the application of the particular product is mentioned.

3.2.6 SUPER PLASTICIZER

Super Plasticizers are basically the chemical admixture which helps in

varying the workability, setting time etc. without affecting on the strength of the
concrete. Several range of products are available in the market for the particular
property as super plasticizer, namely

 Sulphonated melamine
 Napthalene Sulphonated
 Modified Sulphonaes
 Conplast SP 430 DIS

In this project I am using CONPLAST SP 430 DIS which is the product of

FOSROC which helps in improving the workability of the concrete mix.

The quantity of super plasticizer used = 2% of the total weight of fly ash + GGBFS

Fig 3.10 Superplasticizer

3.2.7 HOT AIR OVEN

Hot air oven plays a very important role in the over all project. It is used to
cure the concrete in the sense it activates the binding and bond between the alkaline
solution of low calcium fly ash. Hence the set up of the hot air oven includes

 Set up of Iron frame of 7’x4’4’

 Fixing of GI sheet to the plywood.
 Assembling of GI sheet fixed plywood for the frame
 Bolting of the plywood and making door
 Wiring connection for the heater and fan

The following figures shows the set up of the hot air oven.
Fig 3.11 Fabrication of HOT AIR OVEN
3.2.7a WORKING PROCESS OF HOT AIR OVEN

The electric items involved in the hot air oven which helps in
maintaining the required temperature inside the closed set up are

1. Thermostat
2. Thermocouple
3. Contactor
4. Heater
5. Fan

1. Thermostat: The name therm means heat or temperature and stat means
controller . As the name itself indicates that it is a temperature controller which
helps in monitoring the overall set up. It is digital reading box in which the
required temperature value can be set up. The main supply Phase and Neutral
of the 220V power supply is given to thermostat. The thermocouple is also
connected to the thermostat. Two wires from the thermostat are connected to
19Ams 4 pole contactor. The heaters are connected to the contactor.
The thermostat used in this set up is SELEC TC344AX.

Fig 3.12 : Thermostat

2. Thermocouple : It is one which sense the temperature. In this set up we used
pt 100 model thermocouple which has 3 wires which are connected to the 10,11
and 12 numbers in the thermostat. It shows the temperature in the thermostat.

3.13 Thermocouple

3. Contactor : As the name itself indicates it is the contactor which helps in

contacting the heater to the power supply from the thermostat. It helps in
supplying voltage to the heaters. The Schneider contactor is used based on the
capacity of the heaters used.

Fig 3.14 : Contactor Fig 3.15 : Fan

 4. Heater : Heaters are used to create a heat inside the set up. Heaters are
connected to the contactor. Here we are using the room heater which are placed
inside the set up.

Fig 3.16 : Heater

5. Fan : Fans are fixed at opposite sides of the box which helps in circulating the
hot air inside the set up thereby marinating the whole set up at constant
temperature.

i. CONNECTION DETAILS.

Fig 3.17 : Connection detail of the controlling set up of hot air oven
ii. OPERATION PROCESS OF THE HOT AIR OVEN.

In the temperature we can observe there is a notation of P V and S V. PV

stands for Present Value and SV stands for set value. If you want to increase the set
limit , press and hold the square button and press upper arrow key , the set
temperature will increase. By doing the soo, the temperature is set for 60 deg.

Once the temperature is set, the thermocouple will sense out the temperature
inside the oven, and that temperature will be displayed in the present value side.
When it is turned on it will be obviously in the room temperature. Since the present
value is less than the set value ( 60 deg) the thermostat will give supply to the
contactor. Contactor will then turned on and it will give limited supply of voltage
to the room heaters.

Once the room heater is turned on, the temperature inside the oven increase
and the present value starts increasing. When the temperature reaches 61 degree
automatically the relay will cut off , the temperature controller will stop supply to
the contactor and thus to the room heater is turned off. Once the temperature
decreases below 59 deg automatically the thermostat starts supplying voltage to the
contactor and thus the room heater will again turns on.The plus or minus range of
cut off and on value can be changed.

Fig 3.18: Temperature controlling in thermostat

To increase temperature Set value = Hold square button + press arrow up button

To decrease temperature Set value = Hold square button + press arrow down button
CHAPTER- 4

MIX DESIGN OF GEO POLYMER CONCRETE

WITH 16 MOLAR CONCENTRATION.

4.1 INTRODUCTION ON MIX-DESIGN OF THE GEO

POLYMER CONCRETE
Mix design is the basic concept for every grade of concrete. Without mix
design the desired strength cannot be obtained. It gives the measure of the quantity
of the materials to be used to get the particular strength. On the other hand we have
the mix design code for the preparation of conventional concrete. Based on the
IS 10262 we can do mix design for M10, M15, M20 etc.

But when come to the geo polymer concrete no specific codes are still
mentioned to get the desired strength. Hence based on the research work conducted
by Dr.Vijaya Rangan B V the mix design is calculated. Dr.Vijaya Rangan B V has
done and still doing research from 10 years has got firm grip on the mix design of
the geo polymer concrete. From the reference of his journals mix design was done.

As like in conventional concrete we cannot the deside the strength preliminarily. It

means if we want to get the strength around 30 Mpa we are supposed to use 8M
concentration of the alkaline solution and water to solids solids ratio should be in
the range of 0.24. So based on the key points which will alter the strength, the mix
design is calculated.

In this study i used 16 molar concentration and the mix design for this
corresponding is detailed next.

4.2 MATERIALS REQUIRED FOR MIX DESIGN

 Fly ash ( Class F)
 Molar concentration of NaOH solution = 16M
 Na2SiO3 to NaOH solution ration = 2.5
 Alkaline solution to binder ratio is = 0.45
 Aggregates used = 77% of mass of concrete
 Super plasticizer used = 2 % of fly ash
 Fibers used = Steel fiber 0.6 % and Glass fiber 2 %
4.3 MIX DESIGN CALCULATION FOR THE PRESENT
STUDY
Step 1 : In general unit weight of the concrete = 2400 kg/m3

Step 2 : Mass of combined (coarse & fine) aggregates = 77 % of the mass of concrete

= 77 x 2400 = 1848 kg/m3

Step 3 : i. Coarse aggregates

% of 20 mm aggregates = 15 = 0.15x1848 = 277.2 kg/m3

% of 12.5 mm aggregates = 20 = 0.20 x 1848 = 370 kg/m3

% of 6 mm aggregates = 35 = 0.35 x 1848 = 647 kg/m3

ii. Fine aggregates

% of sand used = 30 = 0.3x1848 kg/m3 = 554.4 kg/m3

Step 4 : Mass of fly ash and alkaline solution = 2400 – 1848

= 552 kg/m3

Let the alkaline solution to the fly ash ratio by mass = 0.35

552
Step 5 : Mass of the fly ash = = 408.89 kg/m3
(1  0.35)

Step 6 : Mass of alkaline liquid = 552 – 408.89 = 143.11 kg/m3

Let the ratio of Na2SiO3 to NaOH solution = 2.5

Step 7 : Then the mass of Sodium hydroxide solution is calculated as

143.11
= = 40.89 kg/ m3
(1  2.5)

Step 8 : Then the mass of Sodium silicate solution = ( 143.11- 40.89) = 102.22 kg/ m3

TRIAL MIX / PROPORTION

 Mass of combined aggregates = 1848 kg/ m3

 Mass of fly ash = 408.89 kg/ m3
 NaOH solution = 40.89 kg/ m3
 Na2SiO3 solution = 102.22 kg/ m3
 SiO 2
Step 9 : In the Sodium silicate solution ; let the =2
NaO 2

( NaO2 = 14.5 , SiO2 = 33.905 , Water = 51.535 )

a. In the Sodium Silicate solution

Water content = 52.64
Solids = 49.58
b. In sodium hydroxide solution
Solids = 18.15
Water content = 22.74
c. Therefore the total mass of water = 75.38
d. Therefore the total mass of geo- polymer solids = 476.62
e. The ratio of water to geo-polymer solids = 0.16

Step 10 : Geo polymer concrete mixture for kg/m3

 Coarse aggregate required

 20 mm down size aggregate = 277 kg/ m3
 12 mm down size aggregate = 370 kg/ m3
 6 mm down size aggregate = 647 kg/ m3
 Sand required = 554.4 kg/m3
 Fly ash required = 408.89 kg/m3
 Sodium silicate solution required
 Solids = 49.58 kg/m3
 Water = 52.64 kg/m3
 Sodium hydroxide solution required
 Solids = 18.15 kg/m3
 Water = 22.74 kg/m3
 Super plasticizer required = 2 % by mass of the total fly ash+GGBFS
= 0.2 x (408.89)
= 81.78 ml
Note: To prepare 16 Molarity solution
To prepare the solution of 16 molarity , take 16 x 40 = 640 grams of sodium
hydroxide pellets and dissolve it in 1000 ml of distilled water. Once adding water
to the sodium hydroxide pellets stir well until pellets gets dissolved. Maintain the
molarity for any required quantity of solution by doing the above so.

4.3.1 QUANTITY OF THE MATERIALS REQUIRED FOR THE

PREPARATION OF THE GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE.

Table 4.1 : Materials required for the GPC preparation

SL.No Materials required Mass, kg/ m3

1 Coarse aggregate 15% 20 mm 277
20% 12.5 mm 370
35% 6 mm 647
2 Fine aggregate 554.4
3 Fly ash 408.89
4 Na2SiO3 102.22
5 NaOH 40.89
6 Super plasticizer 2%
7 Hybrid Fibers 3Ds Steel fiber Glass fiber
2% 0.6
8 Extra water 5 % to the total weight of concrete

4.3.2 TOTAL SPECIMES NEEDS TO CAST

Table 4.2 : Total specimens need to cast for testing

Compressive strength Split tensile strength Flexural strength

7 Days 14 days 28 days 7 Days 14 days 28 days 7 Days 14 days 28 days
curing curing curing curing curing curing curing curing curing
3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials 3 trials
Total 9 specimens Total 9 specimens Total 9 specimens
 TRIAL MIX CALCULATION:
 Volume of one cube = 3375000 mm3
 Total volume of 3 cubes = 10125000 mm3
 Batches : B1 = Fly ash (80%) GGBFS (20%)
B2 = Fly ash (60%) GGBFS (40%)
B3 = Fly ash (40%) GGBFS (60%)
B4 = Fly ash (20%) GGBFS (80%)
 For batch B1 : Total fly ash and GGBS = 0.010125 x 408.89 kg/m3
= 4.14 kg
 Fly ash required = 4.14 x 0.8 = 3.312 kg
 GGBFS required = 4.14 x 0.2 = 0.828 kg
 Fine aggregate required = 0.010125 x 554.4 = 5.512 kg
 Coarse aggregate 20 mm = 0.010125 x 277 = 2.80 kg
12.5 mm = 0.010125 x 370 = 3.75 kg
6 mm = 0.010125 x 647 = 6.55 kg
 Sodium hydroxide required = 0.010125 x 40.89= 0.414 kg
 Sodium silicate required = 0.010125 x 102.22 =1.03 kg
 Super plasticizer = 2 % of ( Fly ash + GGBFS)
= 0.02 x 4.14
= 83 ml
 3Ds fibers required = 2% by weight of concrete
=0.02 x (4.14+5.515+2.80+3.75+6.55)
= 45.5 gms
 Glass fibers required = 0.6 kg/m3
= 0.6 x 0.010125 x 1000
= 6 gms

Similarly variation of weight of Fly ash and GGBFS are done for different batch of mix
i.e., for Batch 2 , Batch 3 and Batch 4 are calculated and mixed.
i. Parameters in the project are
 Variation of % replacement of GGBFS
 Adding Hybrid fibers
 Molarity of the solution
 Testing of specimens without adding fibers

ii. No of specimens required to cast as per the parameter % of replacement of

GGBFS
The specimens are casted as per the required calculation and the results are entered
in the table. Finally the results are compared with the addition of concrete with the
fibers and the concrete without fibers. The comparison of results are done with
plotting graph.

Table 4.3: Total specimens need to cast

Test to be conducted Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 4

With addition of 80% FA & 60% FA & 40% FA & 20% FA &
hybrid fibers 20% GGBFS 40% GGBFS 60% GGBFS 80% GGBFS
Compressive strength 9 9 9 9
Split tensile strength 9 9 9 9
Flexural strength 9 9 9 9
Total specimens 27 27 27 27
.’. Totally 108 specimens needs to be casted for 7,14 & 28 days of curing
Test to be conducted Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 4
Without addition of 80% FA & 60% FA & 40% FA & 20% FA &
hybrid fibers 20% GGBFS 40% GGBFS 60% GGBFS 80% GGBFS
Compressive strength 9 9 9 9
Split tensile strength 9 9 9 9
Flexural strength 9 9 9 9
Total specimens 27 27 27 27
.’. Totally 108 specimens needs to be casted for 7,14 & 28 days of curing
CHAPTER 5

EXPERIMENTAL WORK CONDUCTED FOR THE

PRESENT STUDY IN LABORATORY

5.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPERIMENT

The concrete preparation for making the specimens is similar to the
conventional concrete. The basic materials required for the concrete is first sieved
and kept ready for the weighing as per the requirement. The main step of preparing
the alkaline solution is done before 24 hours prior to the casting. The aggregates
used here are in saturated surface dry condition.

5.2 FLOW OF WORK IN PREPARATION OF THE SPECIMENS

NaOH Na2SiO3 Fine Fly ash &

Solution solution aggregate GGBS

Both are mixed and kept for 24 hrs

Coarse
aggregate
Alkaline s
Dry
solution
mix

Hybrid fibers

Dry mix is added with alkaline solution and Hybrid

fibers along with super plasicizer and Extra 5 %
water is added. Finally mixed thoroughly

Super
GEO POLYMER CONCRETE plasticizer

Fig 5.1 : Geo Polymer concrete preparation

5.2.1 PREPARATION OF SPECIMENS FOR DIFFERENT TEST

The specimens are selected based on the test we are going to conduct. We
are conducting experiment on mechanical properties, hence need to conduct
compressive strength, split tensile and flexural strength test.

1. CUBES for compressive strength test

2. CYLINDERS for split tensile strength test
3. BEAMS or PRISM for flexural strength test.

5.3 MOULDS SIZE AND CORRESPONDING TESTS

Table 5.1 : Different moulds used for the study

Moulds Corresponding Test Size of the Specimen

Cubes Compressive strength 150 x 150 x150 mm
Cylinder Split tensile strength D = 150 mm, h= 300
BEams Flexural strength L=500mm, B=100mm, D=100mm

5.4 SPECIMEN PREPARATION

The above mentioned specimens are collected and are cleaned by using the
wire brush. Once the specimens are cleaned it is checked once again and the bolts
are tightened. Later the moulds are oiled completely inside it. Edges of the moulds
are properly oiled so that the finishing of the moulds after demoulding will be good.

Fig 5.2: Cleaning and oiling of the specimens

5.5 SIEVING OF AGGREGATES
In this study I am using the coarse aggregates of size 20mm, 12.5 mm and 6 mm
down size. The reason behind in using different sized aggregates is that it makes
the aggregates uniformly graded. Hence the vaoids will be properly filled if we add
fine aggregates. Hence it makes the concrete to be more compactible and also
increase strength to the certain level. The coarse aggregates are used in SSD
condition. Fine aggregates are sieved using 4.75 mm sieve and collected.

5.6 PREPARATION OF MIX

Once the specimens are prepared and aggregates are sieved, the aggregates
are weighed and poured into a clean plane surface. After placing all the aggregates
fly and GGBFS are poured into the aggregates. Later the dry mix is done thoroughly.
For the First Batch of mix Fly ash of 80% and 20% GGBFS is used. Next the alkaline
solution is added to the dry mix and mixing is done once again. Finally the 3DS
fibers and Glass fibers are measured and added along with superplasticizer and
additional 5% water and mixed thoroughly until the fibers are distributed
throughout.Finally the mix is filled to the oiled specimens and compacted using
tamping rod to the best of it and surface is struck off using the trowel.

Fig 5.3: Dry mix Fig 5.4: Alkaline solution added to the dry mix

Fig 5.5: Addition of fibers and superplaticizer Fig 5.6: Filling and compaction
5.7 DEMOULDING AND PLACING IN THE HOT AIR OVEN
After 24 hours of casting demoulding is done carefully. The demoulded
specimens are placed inside the hot air oven carefully without damaging the moulds.
Once all the specimens are placed inside the hot air oven, the door is closed and the
oven is turned. The temperature is set to 60 deg Celsius in the thermostat as
explained in the working procedure of hot air oven. Once the temperature is set time
is note down and after 24 hours the oven is turned off and specimens are allowed to
cool by opening the door. The specimens are taken out kept aside for ambient curing.
For 7 days , 14 days and 28 days the tests are conducted and the results are entered
in the table.

Fig 5.7 : Specimens are after demoulding

Fig 5.8: Specimens after hot air oven curing

5.8 STUDY OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES TEST
CONDUCTED
5.8.1 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST ON GPC WITH GGBS AND
HYBRID FIBERS
Compressive strength is defined as the resistance of the material to break
under the tension. It will measure the strength of the specimen to bear the load over
the applied area or surface.

The specimens are placed in the compressive strength testing machine. The
surface should be even and smooth. The machine is turned on and maximum load
carrying capacity is found out.

Using the braking load or failure load the compressive strength is calculated
failure load
as, Compressive strength = .Measure in terms of N/mm2
area

Fig 5.9: Compression strength test Fig 5.10: Failure of the cubes under
compression
Table 5.1 Compressive strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC
with GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N/mm2)

FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive

BATCH (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)

405.4 18.02

F80G20 80 20 373.4 16.6 18.93

(B1) 498.6 22.16

569.8 25.32

F60G40 60 40 545.6 24.25 24.8

(B2) 558.6 24.83

902.4 40.11

F40G60 40 60 923.6 41.01 40.65

(B3) 918.4 40.82

803.9 35.73

F20G80 20 80 536.6 23.85 31

(B4) 786.6 34.96

In the table F80G20. F means Fly ash and 80 means % of fly ash. G means GGBFS
and 20 means % of replacement of fly ash with GGBFS.

The above table corresponds for the test results conducted for 7 days of ambient
curing. It is observed from the above table it is observed that the compressive strength
increase as the GGBFS percentage increases from Batch 1 to Batch 4. And results getting
more for the Batch 3 mix and batch 4 mix is quite higher than batch 3 result.
Table 5.2 Compressive strength test result for 7 days curing of
GPC with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N/mm2)

Batch FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive
(B) (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)

373.4 16.60
F80G20 80 20
405.4 18.02 17.45
(B1)
398.6 17.72

569.8 25.32
F60G40 60 40
545.6 24.25 24.80
(B2)
558.4 24.82

902.4 40.11
F40G60 40 60
923.6 41.05 40.67
(B3)
918.8 40.84

803.9 35.73
F20G80 20 80
536.6 23.85 31.56
(B4)
789.9 35.11
Table 5.3 Compressive strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC
with GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N/mm2)

Batch FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive
(B) (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)
458.3 20.37

F80G20 80 20 383.4 17.04 18.72

(B1) 421.6 18.74

734.5 32.64

F60G40 60 40 923.6 41.04 37.37

(B2) 864.6 38.43

923.8 41.06

F40G60 40 60 885.8 39.67 40.34

(B3) 906.4 40.28

861.6 38.29

F20G80 20 80 859.3 38.19 38.7

(B4) 891.5 39.62
Table 5.4 Compressive strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC
with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N/mm2)

Batch FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive
(B) (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)
525.6 23.36

F80G20 80 20 429.5 19.09 21.77

(B1) 514.2 22.85

818 36.36

F60G40 60 40 844.2 37.52 32.34

(B2) 520.4 23.13

762 33.87

F40G60 40 60 961.6 42.74 42.88

(B3) 1170.8 52.04

702.9 31.24

F20G80 20 80 861.3 38.28 38.26

(B4) 1018.3 45.26
Table 5.5 Compressive strength test result for 28 days curing of GPC
with GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N/mm2)

Batch FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive
(B) (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)
728 32.36

F80G20 80 20 592.6 26.34 27.18

(B1) 514.2 22.85

818.0 36.36

F60G40 60 40 844.2 37.52 36.42

(B2) 796.2 35.39

1350.8 60.04

F40G60 40 60 1276.4 59.65 60.62

(B3) 1398.9 62.17

1046 46.49

F20G80 20 80 816.6 36.29 42.28

(B4) 991.2 44.05
Table 5.6 Compressive strength test result for 28 days curing of GPC
with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

Formula = load/ area ( N /mm2)

Batch FlyAsh GGBFS Load Compressive Avg Compressive
(B) (%) (%) (kN) strength (N/ mm2) strength (N/ mm2)
469.3 20.86

F80G20 80 20 491.5 21.84 21.34

(B1) 480.2 21.34

914 40.62

F60G40 60 40 981.4 43.62 41.29

(B2) 891.6 39.63

818.2 36.36

F40G60 40 60 1060.8 47.15 44.14

(B3) 1100.4 48.91

1035.7 46.06

F20G80 20 80 890.5 39.58 43.15

(B4) 985.8 43.81
5.6 SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST ON GPC

For this test the cylinders of diameter D = 150 mm and height 300 mm are.
And after curing followed by casting the tests are conducted for the mentioned 7,14
and 28 days curing with varying batches like B1.B2,B3 and B4 with the addition of
fibers and the same is compared without the addition of fibers with GGBFS for the
both the case.

Place the specimen in the testing machine and get the failure load. The failure
pattern of cylinder under split tensile strength is shown in the fig.

The split tensile strength is calculated as,

 2P  2
Split tensile strength =   N/mm
 DL 
Where, P is the applied failure load in KN
D is the diameter of the cylinder measured in mm
L is the height of the cylinder measured in mm

Fig 5.11 : Cylinder kept for split tensile strength test

Table 5.7 Split tensile strength test of GPC for 7 and 14 days curing with
GGBFS and with hydrid fibers

Split Tensile Strength  2P  2

Formula =   N/ mm
 DL 
% Replacement 7 Days test result 14 Days test result
Fly ash GGBFS Load Strength Mean Load Strength Avg
(%) (%) (kN) N/ mm2 Strength (kN) (N/ mm2) strength
183.9 2.60 191.4 2.71
176.1 2.49 2.55 144.7 2.05 2.33
80 20
180.6 2.55 158.6 2.24
180.3 2.55 153.4 2.17
154 2.18 2.42 218.9 3.09 2.58
60 40
178.4 2.52 175.3 2.48
221 3.13 255.8 3.62
233.5 3.30 3.17 224.8 3.18 3.38
40 60
218.6 3.09 235.6 3.33

215.5 3.04 243.2 3.44

219.7 3.11 3.03 243 3.43 3.24
20 80
208.3 2.95 201.6 2.85

Fig 5.12 : Failure of cylinder under split tesnile strength test

Table 5.8 Split tensile strength test result of GPC for 7 and 14 days
curing with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

Split Tensile Strength  2P  2

Formula =   N/ mm
 DL 
7 Days test result 14 Days test result
Fly ash GGBFS Load Strength Mean Load Strength Avg
(%) (%) (kN) N/ mm2 Strength (kN) (N/ mm2) strength
105.8 1.42 142.3 2.01
135.6 1.92 1.67 135.5 1.92 2.01
80 20
119.1 1.68 149.4 2.11
190.8 2.70 161.3 2.28
206.2 2.92 2.68 142.6 2.01 2.78
60 40
171.5 2.43 158.2 2.24
183.4 2.59 227.9 3.22
235.4 3.33 2.96 219.2 3.10 3.06
40 60
209.6 2.97 201.6 2.85

211.4 2.99 171.3 2.42

191.5 2.71 2.87 195.6 2.77 2.63
20 80
205.1 2.90 190.1 2.69
Table 5.9 Split tensile strength test result of GPC for 28 days curing
with GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers

 2P  2
Split Tensile Strength=   N/ mm
 DL 

Batch Fly ash GGBFS Load Split tensile Avg.

strength Strength
(B) (%) (%) (kN)
176.1 2.49

F80G20 80 20 162.6 2.3 2.45

(B1)
180.2 2.55

164.4 2.33

F60G40 60 40 194.1 2.75 2.44

(B2)
158.6 2.24
210.3 2.98

F40G60 40 60 223.7 3.16 3.67

(B3)
344.7 4.88
238.5 3.37

F20G80 20 80 207.7 2.94 3.29

(B4) 251.1 3.55
Table 5.10 Split tensile strength result of GPC for 28 days curing with
GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

 2P  2
Split Tensile Strength=   N/ mm
 DL 

Batch Fly ash GGBFS Load Split tensile Avg.

strength Strength
(B) (%) (%) (kN)
155.4 2.19

F80G20 80 20 142.3 2.01 2.15

(B1)
158.6 2.24

161.2 2.28

F60G40 60 40 161.3 2.28 2.33

(B2)
172 2.43
223.3 3.16

F40G60 40 60 227.9 3.22 3.24

(B3)
236 3.34
180.6 2.55

F20G80 20 80 171.3 2.42 2.55

(B4) 189.4 2.68
5.11 FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE
WITH GGBFS AND HYBRID FIBERS
Flexural strength is one of the measure of tensile load carrying capacity of
the unreinforced beam or prism. For this test beam depth and depth of 100 mm x
100 mm are used with the length atleast 3 times its depth.

The specimens are placed in the machine as shown in fig. After placing the
beam in the UTM machine the breaking load is determined. By using the breaking
load, the flexural strength of the beam is calculated by using the formula.

 PL 
Flexural strength =  2 
N/ mm2
 BD 

Where , P is the breaking load found in kN

L is the length of the beam measured in mm
B is the breadth of the beam measured in mm
D is the depth of the beam measured in mm

Fig 5.13: Two point loading for flexural strength test

 Fig 5.14: Placing of beams for flexural strength test

Table 5.11 Flexural strength test result of GPC for 7 and 14 days curing
with GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers.

Flexural Strength  PL 
Formula =  2 
N/ mm2
 BD 
7 Days test result 14 Days test result
Fly ash GGBFS Load Strength Mean Load Strength Avg
(%) (%) (kN) N/ mm2 Strength (kN) (N/ mm2) strength

4 1.5 4 2
80 20 2.5 1.25 5.5 2.75
1.45 2.33
3.2 1.6 4.5 2.25

7. 3.5 7.5 3.75

60 40 3.5 1.75 2.67 5.5 2.75 3.23

5.5 2.75 6.4 3.2

7 3.5 9.5 4.75

40 60 7.5 3.75 3.33 6.5 3.25 4.1

5.5 2.75 8.6 4.3

7.5 3.75 9 4.5

20 80 4.5 2.25 3 6 3 3.58

6 3 6.5 3.25
Table 5.12 Flexural strength test result of GPC for 7 and 14 days curing
with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

Flexural Strength  PL 
Formula =  2 
N/ mm2
 BD 
7 Days test result 14 Days test result
Fly ash GGBFS Load Strength Mean Load Strength Avg
(%) (%) (kN) N/ mm2 Strength (kN) (N/ mm2) strength

4 2 2.5 1.25
80 20 2.5 1.25 3 1.5
1.42 1.5
2 1 3.5 1.75

4.5 2.25 4 2

60 40 3 1.5 1.75 4 2 2.08

3 1.5 4.5 2.25

7 3.5 6.5 3.25

40 60 5.5 2.75 3.08 6 3 3.25

6 3 7 3.5

4 2 7 3.5

20 80 5 2.5 2.25 6.5 3.25 3.17

4.5 2.25 5.5 2.75
Table 5.13 Flexural strength test result of GPC for 28 days curing with

GGBFS and with Hybrid fibers

 PL 
Flexural Strength =  2 
N/ mm2
 BD 

Batch Fly ash GGBFS Load Split tensile Avg.

strength Strength
(B) (%) (%) (kN)
4.5 2.25

F80G20 80 20 5 2.5 2.42

(B1)
5 2.5

5 2.5

F60G40 60 40 5.5 2.75 2.67

(B2)
5.5 2.75
6.5 3.25

F40G60 40 60 8 4 3.75
(B3)
8 4
7 3.5

F20G80 20 80 7.5 3.75 3.42

(B4) 6 3
Table 5.14 Flexural strength test result of GPC for 28 days curing with

GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers

 PL 
Flexural Strength =  2 
N/ mm2
 BD 

Batch Fly ash GGBFS Load Split tensile Avg.

strength Strength
(B) (%) (%) (kN)
2 1

F80G20 80 20 3.5 1.75 1.42

(B1)
3 1.5

6 3

F60G40 60 40 5.5 2.75 2.67

(B2)
4.5 2.25
7.5 3.75

F40G60 40 60 7 3.5 3.5

(B3)
6.5 3.25
6 3

F20G80 20 80 5.5 2.75 2.75

(B4) 5 2.5
CHAPTER-6

TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF THE

EXPERIMENTAL WORK CONDUCTED

6.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Geo polymer concrete with partial replacement of Fly ash by GGBFS and with
hybrid fibers are done study the mechanical properties of the concrete. The
experimental study was conducted to study the variation in mechanical property of the
geo polymer concrete in which GGBFS and hybrid fibers are the key variable. The
experimental results are compared with the concrete having fibers and the GPC having
hybrid fibers.

Compressive strength test are conducted for cubes for size 150 x 150 mm , split
tensile strength are conducted with the cylinders of dia 150 mm and height 300mm and
the flexural strength is conducted with beam or prism of size 500 x 100 x 100 mm.

Every mechanical property test has its own advantage and shows variations in
every variation of replacement of GGBFS. The major thing in this experimental study
is , the fibers percentage is kept constant, only GGBFS percentage are varied with the
fly ash content.
6.2 DISCUSSION ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST
RESULTS
After casting of the cubes it is kept for 24 hours in hot air oven maintained
60 deg throught during the entire duration. After 24 hours the specimens are taken
out and kept for ambient curing. Test are conducted for 7, 14 and 28 days of the
ambient curing. In this section the comparison of the results for 7, 14 and 28 of
curing of GPC with GGBFS and hybrid fibers and GPC with GGBFS without
hybrid fibers are conducted. And also the noticed the optimum mix which has given
the maximum strength.

Table 6.2.1 Average compressive strength of GPC

Mix Fly GGB 7 Days Result 14 Days Result 28 Days Result

Combination ash FS With Without With Without With Without
% % Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid
fibers fibers fibers fibers fibers Fibers

F80G20 80 20 18.93 17.45 18.72 21.77 27.18 21.34

F60G40 60 40 24.83 24.80 37.37 32.34 36.42 41.29

F40G60 40 60 40.65 40.7 40.34 42.8 60.62 44.14

F20G80 20 80 31 31.65 38.7 38.26 42.28 43.15

From the above table it is observed that the compressive strength of the Geo
polymer concrete with GGBFS and with Hybrid was found to be little bit lesser than
the GPC with GGBFS and without Hybrid fibers. But at the 28 days of curing the
GPC with GGBFS and hybrid fibers has achieved the more strength than the GPC
wihout hybrid fibers. And the maximum is achieved for Batch 3 mix, i.e., the total
fly ash in that mix was 40% and the GGBFS percentage was 60%.

The variation of the average strength is plotted for 7 , 14 and 28 days of the test.
The maximum compressive strength achieved is 60.62 Mpa for the Geo polymer
concrete with GGBFS and hybrid fibers.
 7 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULT
45

Compressive Strength N/mm2

40.7 40.65
40
35 31.65 31
30
24.8 24.83
25
18.93
20 17.45
15
10
5
0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 17.45 24.8 40.7 31.65
With Hybrid Fibers 18.93 24.83 40.65 31

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.1 Compressive strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers

7 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

45
Compressive Strength N/mm2

40.7
40

35 40.65 31.65
30
24.83 31
25
18.93 24.8
20

15 17.45
10

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With fibers 18.93 24.83 40.65 31
Without Fibers 17.45 24.8 40.7 31.65

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.1 Compressive strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers
 14 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULT
45 42.8

Compressive Strength N/mm2

40.34
40 37.37 38.26 38.7

35 32.34
30
25
21.77
18.72
20
15
10
5
0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 21.77 32.34 42.8 38.26
With Fibers 18.72 37.37 40.34 38.7

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.2 Compressive strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers

14 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

45 42.8
Compressive Strength N/mm2

38.7
40 37.37
40.34
35 38.26
30 32.34
25 21.77

20
15 18.72

10
5
0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 18.72 37.37 40.34 38.7
Without Hybrid Fibers 21.77 32.34 42.8 38.26

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.2 Compressive strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers
 28 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULT

Compressive Strength N/mm2

70
60.62
60

50
44.14 43.1542.28
41.29
40 36.42

30 27.18
21.34
20

10

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 21.34 41.29 44.14 43.15
With Fibers 27.18 36.42 60.62 42.28

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.3 Compressive strength test results for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
with hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers in bar chart.

28 DAYS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

70
Compressive Strength N/mm2

60.62
60

50
41.29 44.14 42.28
40
27.18 38.7
30 36.42

20
21.34
10

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 27.18 36.42 60.62 42.28
Without Hybrid Fibers 21.34 41.29 44.14 38.7

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.3 Compressive strength test results for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
with hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers in graph.
6.3TEST RESULT DISCUSSION ON SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH

After the curing of the specimens in the hot air oven the specimens are taken
out and kept out for ambient curing. And the tests are conducted at 7,14 and 28 days.
The results obtained are tabulated in the chapter 5, the average split tensile strength of
the results are tabulated in this and plotted graph for the respective average strength.

In this section the comparison of the split tensile strength with GPC having
varying percentage of GGBFS replacement with fly ash by keeping the hybrid fibers
constant are compared with the same without having the hybrid fibers. The average
strength are tabulated in the below table.

Mix Fly GGB 7 Days Result 14 Days Result 28 Days Result

Combination ash FS With Without With Without With Without
% % Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid
fibers fibers fibers fibers fibers Fibers

F80G20 80 20 2.55 1.67 2.3 2.01 2.45 2.15

F60G40 60 40 2.42 2.68 2.58 2.78 2.44 2.33

F40G60 40 60 3.17 2.96 3.38 3.06 3.67 3.24

F20G80 20 80 3.03 2.87 3.24 2.63 3.29 2.55

From the above table of results it is observed that the split tensile strength of the the
GPC with GGBFS and hybrid fibers found to be increase from 7 days to 28 days and
also the GPC with GGBFS and hybrid fibers has achieved the strength more than
without hybrid fibers.

And also the maximum strength is got for the mix of batch 3 which contains fly ash
40 percentage and GGBFS 60 percentage. And it is confirmed that the batch 4 mix has
achieved more strength when compared to batch 2 mix. On the other hand the strength
decreases after certain range of replacement of fly ash with GGBFS.
 7 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
3.5

Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.17
3.03
2.96 2.87
3
2.55 2.68
2.42
2.5

2
1.67
1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 1.67 2.68 2.96 2.87
With Fibers 2.55 2.42 3.17 3.03
Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.4 Split tensile strength test results for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without fibers.

7 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

3.5 3.17
Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.03
3
2.55
2.42 2.96 2.87
2.5

2 1.67

1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 2.55 2.42 3.17 3.03
Without Hybrid Fibers 1.67 2.42 2.96 2.87

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.4 Split tensile strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers.
 14 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
4

Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.5 3.38 3.24
3.06
3 2.78
2.58 2.63
2.5 2.3
2.01
2

1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 2.01 2.78 3.06 2.63
With Fibers 2.3 2.58 3.38 3.24

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.5 Split tensile strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers.

14 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

4
Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.38
3.5 3.24

3 2.78
3.06
2.5 2.3
2.58 2.63
2
2.01
1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 2.01 2.78 3.06 2.63
Without Hybrid Fibers 2.3 2.58 3.38 3.24

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.5 Split tensile strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers.
 28 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
4

Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.67
3.5 3.24 3.29

3
2.45 2.44 2.55
2.5 2.33
2.15
2

1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 2.15 2.33 3.24 2.55
With Fibers 2.45 2.44 3.67 3.29

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.6 Split tensile strength test result for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers.

28 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

4 3.67
Split tensile Strength N/mm2

3.5 3.24

3 3.24
2.45 2.33
2.5
2.55
2 2.44
2.15
1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 2.45 2.44 3.67 3.24
Without Hybrid Fibers 2.15 2.33 3.24 2.55

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.6 Split tensile strength test results for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers.
6.4 TEST RESULTS DISCUSSION ON FLEXURAL
STRENGTH
As detailed above , flexural strength test is conducted on GPC with GGBFS
with hybrid fibers and without hybrid fibers. In this the average test results were
tabulated and the graph were plotted for all the % variation of the mix.

Fly GGBFS 7 Days Result 14 Days Result 28 Days Result

Combination

ash % With Without With Without With Without

Mix

% Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid

fibers fibers fibers fibers fibers Fibers

F80G20 80 20 1.45 1.42 2.33 1.5 2.42 1.42

F60G40 60 40 2.67 1.75 3.23 2.08 2.67 2.67

F40G60 40 60 3.33 3.08 4.1 3.25 3.75 3.5

F20G80 20 80 3 2.25 3.58 3.17 3.42 2.75

From the above table the flexural strength of the GPC with GGBFS was found to be
increased with the increase in curing days. The maximum strength is achieved for the
batch 3 mix which has 40% fly ash and 60% GGBFS with hybrid fibers. On the other
hand the GPC without hybrid fibers has also the maximum strength for batch 3 mix which
is giving less strength than the GPC with fibers.

The chart and graph for the flexural strength for 7, 14 and 28 days of curing is
plotted.
 7 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
3.5 3.33

Flexural Strength N/mm2

3.08 3
3 2.67
2.5 2.25

2 1.75
1.42 1.45
1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 1.42 1.75 3.08 2.25
With Fibers 1.45 2.67 3.33 3

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.7 Flexural strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers

7 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

3.33
3.5
Felxural Strength N/mm2

3
3 2.67
3.08
2.5 2.25

2
1.45
1.5 1.75

1.42
1

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 1.45 2.67 3.33 3
Without Hybrid Fibers 1.42 1.75 3.08 2.25

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.7 Flexural strength test result for 7 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers
 14 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
4.5
4.1

Flexural Strength N/mm2

4
3.58
3.5 3.23 3.25 3.17
3
2.5 2.33
2.08
2
1.5
1.5
1
0.5
0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 1.5 2.08 3.25 3.17
With Fibers 2.33 3.23 4.1 3.58

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.8 Flexural strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers

14 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

4.5 4.1
Flexural Strength N/mm2

4 3.58
3.5 3.23
3.25
3 3.17
2.33
2.5 2.08
2
1.5
1.5
1
0.5
0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 2.33 3.23 4.1 3.58
Without Hybrid Fibers 1.5 2.08 3.25 3.17

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.8 Flexural strength test result for 14 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers
 28 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS
4 3.67

Flexural Strength N/mm2

3.5 3.42
3.5

3 2.67 2.75
2.67
2.42
2.5

1.5 1.42

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F80G20
Without fibers 1.42 2.67 3.5 2.75
With Fibers 2.42 2.67 3.67 3.42

Varying % Of Fly ash and GGBFS

Fig 6.9 Flexural strength test result for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBS with
hybrid fibers v/s without hybrid fibers

28 DAYS FlEXURAL STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

4 3.67
N/mm2

3.42
3.5
3.5
3 2.67
Flexural Strength

2.42
2.5 2.75
2.67
2
1.42
1.5

0.5

0
F80G20 F60G40 F40G60 F20G80
With Hybrid fibers 2.42 2.67 3.67 3.42
Without Hybrid Fibers 1.42 2.67 3.5 2.75

Varying Proportion of Fly ash and GGBFS

Graph 6.9 Flexural strength test result for 28 days curing of GPC with GGBFS
and hybrid fibers v/s without fibers
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION

7.1 GENERAL

After the complete study of the geo polymer concrete with GGBFS and
hybrid fibers over 28 days of curing the results are detailed in the chapter 6. The
final conclusions after observing the complete study is detailed like below

1. The compressive strength of GPC with GGBFS and Hybrid shows increasing in its
strength from Batch 1 mix ( 80% Fly ash & 20% GGBFS) to Batch 3 mix (
60%GGBFS and 40% Fly ash) shows in decrease of result in Batch 4. It means the
maximum can be achieved for Batch 3 mix which has 60% GGBFS and 40% fly
ash.

2. The test is conducted by preparing 16 molar concentration of the alkaline solution

for which we have obtained maximum compressive strength of 60.12 Mpa. This
agrees with the design table suggested by B.V.Rangan to obtain the compressive
strength of 60 MPa.

3. In split tensile strength , the strength of the mix is maximum for Batch 3 i.e., 3.67
MPa ( 60% GGBFS and 40% Fly ash) and also it is observed that without fibers
has initially given more strength and the strength is maximum for Batch 4 ( 80%
GGBFS and 20% Fly ash) when compared to Batch 1( 20% GGBFS to 80% Fly
ash) and Batch 2 mix (60% Fly ash & 40% GGBFS). It means 2nd maximum
strength is achieved for Batch 4 mix .

4. Finally for flexural strength test the result is maximum for 60% of GGBFS. Max
Flexural strength is 3.75Mpa

5. Hence it is concluded that to obtain maximum strength in 16 molar concentration

use of GGBFS along with hybrid fibers is suggested.
7.2 SCOPE OF FUTURE WORK

1. Different varities of fibers are day by day coming into the market. The
combination of the those fibers are conducted to the future work.

2. Fibers like Anti-crack HP 58/12 1.5 kg/m3 is used in concrete which completely
replaces use of reinforcement in the beam or any strutuctural member.

3. Without curing the specimens for 24 hours at 60 deg celsisus , the specimens are
cured for 2 hours at 500 deg which is supposed to give the same result.

4. Apart from the GGFBS other materials like rice husk ash, mettakilline can be
used in the study.

5. Instead of the river sand , M sand or quarry dust is used and studied.