INTRODUCING FLY ASH-BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE:

MANUFACTURE AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES

D Hardjito*, Curtin University of Technology, Malaysia and Australia
S E Wallah, Curtin University of Technology, Australia
D M J Sumajouw, Curtin University of Technology, Australia
B.V. Rangan, Curtin University of Technology, Australia

30th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 23 - 24 August 2005,

Singapore

Article Online Id: 100030032

The online version of this article can be found at:
http://cipremier.com/100030032

Thisarticleisbroughttoyouwiththesupportof
SingaporeConcreteInstitute
www.scinst.org.sg

AllRightsreservedforCIPremierPTELTD
YouarenotAllowedtoredistributeorresalethearticleinanyformatwithoutwrittenapprovalof
CIPremierPTELTD
VisitOurWebsiteformoreinformation
www.cipremier.com

30th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 23 24 August 2005, Singapore

INTRODUCING FLY ASH-BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE:

MANUFACTURE AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES
D Hardjito*, Curtin University of Technology, Malaysia and Australia
S E Wallah, Curtin University of Technology, Australia
D M J Sumajouw, Curtin University of Technology, Australia
B.V. Rangan, Curtin University of Technology, Australia

ABSTRACT:
This paper presents the results of a study on fly ash-based geopolymer concrete.
The test parameters covered certain aspects of manufacture of geopolymer
concrete. The paper also reports the stress-strain behavior of the concrete with
compressive strength in the range of 40 to 65 MPa. Tests were carried out on
100mmx200mm cylindrical geopolymer concrete specimens. Test results show that
a good agreement exists between the measured stress-strain relations of fly ashbased geopolymer concrete and those predicted by a model developed originally for
Portland cement concrete.
Keywords: Geopolymer concrete; fly ash; manufacture; properties.
1 INTRODUCTION
The development of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete is in response for the need of a greener
concrete in order to reduce the carbon dioxide emission from the cement production. Geopolymer
concrete is manufactured from predominantly silica and alumina containing source material. It offers a
significant opportunity to materialise green concrete as it is possible to utilise an industrial by-product
such as fly ash, to totally replace the use of ordinary Portland cement in concrete, and hence to
reduce the emission of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
Several papers on the engineering properties of geopolymer concrete have been published [1, 49]. In an earlier paper, the authors [7] have reported some results on the stress-strain behaviour in
compression and elastic constants. As these are important material characteristics of concrete,
especially in design of structural concrete members, study on this matter need to be carried out.
This paper presents the effect of some parameters on the engineering properties of fly ash-based
geopolymer concrete. The measured stress-strain curves of geopolymer concrete in compression are
also compared with those calculated using a model available for Portland cement concrete.

2 GEOPOLYMER AND GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE

Geopolymer is an inorganic alumino-silicate polymer synthesized from predominantly silicon (Si)
and aluminum (Al) materials of geological origin or by-product materials such as fly ash. The term
geopolymer was introduced by Davidovits [3] to represent the mineral polymers resulting from
geochemistry. The process involves a chemical reaction under highly alkaline conditions on Si-Al
minerals, yielding polymeric Si-O-Al-O bonds in amorphous form. It has been reported that

geopolymer material does not suffer from alkali-aggregate reaction even in the presence of high
alkalinity [3], and possesses excellent fire resistant [1].
In the authors experimental work, geopolymer is used as the binder, instead of cement paste, to
produce concrete. The geopolymer paste binds the loose coarse aggregates, fine aggregates and
other un-reacted materials together to form the geopolymer concrete. The manufacture of geopolymer
concrete is carried out using the usual concrete technology methods.
As in the Portland cement concrete, the aggregates occupy the largest volume, i.e. about 75-80
% by mass, in geopolymer concrete. The silicon and the aluminum in the fly ash are activated by a
combination of sodium hydroxide and sodium silicate solutions to form the geopolymer paste that
binds the aggregates and other un-reacted materials.

3 MANUFACTURE
3.1 Materials
The materials needed to manufacture the fly ash-based geopolymer concrete are the same as
those for making Portland cement concrete, except for the Portland cement. Low calcium (class F)
dry fly ash obtained from a local power station was used as the source material.
For the alkaline activator, a combination of sodium hydroxide solution and sodium silicate solution
was used. The sodium hydroxide solution was prepared by dissolving the sodium hydroxide solids,
either in the form of pellets or flakes, in water. Extra water and Naphthalene Sulfonate-based
superplasticizer were also added to improve the workability of the fresh fly ash-based geopolymer
concrete. The sodium silicate solution used contained Na2O=14.7%, SiO2=29.4%, and 55.9% of
water, by mass. All the liquids were mixed together before adding to the solids.

3.2 Mixing and Compacting

The aggregates in saturated surface dry condition and the dry fly ash were mixed in a pan mixer
for 3-4 minutes. At the end of this mixing, the liquid component of the geopolymer concrete mixture,
i.e. the combination of the alkaline solution, the superplasticiser and the extra water, was added to the
solids, and the mixing continued for a specified period of time. In this study, the wet mixing period was
designated as the mixing time. The fresh concrete had a stiff consistency and was glossy in
appearance.
The fresh concrete was then cast in moulds. Compaction was performed using the usual practice,
either by applying strokes or using vibration or a combination of both. After casting, the concrete
samples were cured at an elevated temperature for a specified period of time.

3.3 Curing
In this study, curing was carried out at a specified elevated temperature, either in an oven (dry
curing) or in a steam chamber. At the end of the curing period, the test specimens were left in the
mold for about six hours. The samples were then removed from the molds, and left to air dry in the
room temperature before testing at a specified age.

4 EFFECT OF MANUFACTURING PROCESS

In our previous papers, we have reported some aspects of the manufacturing conditions that
affected the properties of the fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. We observed that for specimens
cured at 60oC for 24 hours, the compressive strength did not depend on age, unlike the cement-based
concrete [4-6]. We also reported that geopolymer concrete shows excellent resistance to sulfate
attack [11], and undergoes low creep and very little drying shrinkage [12]. The successful application
of this material to make reinforced geopolymer concrete columns was also reported [10].
Table 1. Composition of fly ash as determined by XRF (mass %)

SiO2

Al2O3

CaO

Cr

Fe2O3

K2O

MgO

Na2O

P2O5

SO3

TiO2

MnO

LOI*)

47.8

24.40

2.42

0.01

17.40

0.55

1.19

0.31

2.00

0.29

1.328

0.12

1.10

*)

LOI = Loss on ignition

Table 2: Details of Mixtures

Mix
No

Aggregates

Fly
Ash

Sodium
Silicate
solution

NaOH
solution

Super
Plasticiser ***)

Added
Water

Curing

[ kg / m3 ]
1

1848

408

103

41 (14 M)

*)

20.7

60 C (Steam)

1848

408

103

41 (14M) *)

16.5

90oC (Steam)

1848

408

103

41 (12 M) *)

14.3

60oC (Steam)

1848

408

103

41 (14M) *)

17.6

60oC (Steam)

**)

14.3

60oC (Steam)

1848

408

103

41 (12M)

1848

408

103

41 (8M) **)

60oC (Oven)

1848

408

103

41 (14M) **)

90oC (Oven)

1848

408

103

41 (8M) **)

90oC (Oven)

6
0
60oC (Steam)
1848
408
103
55.4(8M)
*)
NaOH Commercial Grade (97% purity); **) NaOH Technical Grade (98% purity) ***) Naphthalene
Sulphonate Superplasticiser
9

**)

The chemical composition of fly ash used in this study is given in Table 1; 80% of the fly ash had
particles of less than 38 m in size. The geopolymer concrete was manufactured as described earlier
and was cast in 100x200 mm cylinder steel moulds in 3 layers. Each layer received 60 manual
strokes, and vibrated for ten seconds on a vibrating table. Five cylinders were prepared for each test
variable. The compositions of the mixtures are given in Table 2.
Mixtures 1 and 2 were prepared to investigate the effect of mixing time on the engineering
properties of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. The mixing time ranged from two minutes to sixteen
minutes. The slump of the fresh concrete was measured immediately after mixing.
In the authors work, the term rest period is used to indicate the period between the end of
casting and the start of curing of specimens at an elevated temperature. Previously, we have reported
that a rest period of only 60 minutes before curing in the oven at 60oC for 24 hours did not show any
variation in compressive strength compared to the specimens with no rest period. To investigate the
effect of longer rest periods on the compressive strength, four different mixtures were made i.e.
Mixtures No 3 to 6. The mixing time of these Mixtures was four minutes.
After casting, the specimens from Mixtures No 3, 4 and 6 were left at room temperature until the
start of curing. On the other hand, the specimens from Mixture No 5 were placed in an oven during
the rest period. The oven temperature on the first day of rest period was 32oC; on other days of the
rest period, the temperature was 40oC. This variation in temperature simulated the ambient variations
during the rest period.

4.1 Effect of Mixing Time

As shown in Fig. 1, the slump value decreased when the mixing time increased. Longer mixing
time produced higher compressive strength and higher density (Figs. 2 and 3). This suggests that the
extended mixing time resulted in better polymerisation process, and hence enhanced properties of
hardened concrete.

250

Slum p (m m )

200

Mixture
Mixture
11

150
100

Mixture
Mixture
2 2

50
0
0

10

15

20

Mixing Time (minutes)

Figure 1: Mixing Time versus Slump

Com pressive strength (M Pa)

70
60

Mixture 2

50
40

Mixture 1

30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

Mixing Time (minutes)

Figure 2: Mixing Time versus Compressive Strength

2450

Density (kg/m 3)

2400
2350
2300
2250

Mixture 1

Mixture 2

2200
2150
2100
2050
2000
0

10

15

Mixing Time (minutes)

Figure 3: Mixing Time versus Density

20

Compressive Strength (MPa)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Mixture 6
Mixture 5
Mixture 4
Mixture 3

Rest Period (days)

Figure 4: Rest Period versus Compressive Strength

4.2 Effect of Rest Period

As seen in Fig. 4, the compressive strength of specimens increased with a rest period of one day
or more after casting. The extent of strength gain is significant, in the range of 20 to 50 percent
compared to the compressive strength of specimens with no rest period. The exact reason for this
strength gain during the rest period is unclear. Fundamental research is needed to understand this
phenomenon.

5 STRESS-STRAIN RELATION
5.1 Mixture proportions
Mixtures 7, 8, and 9 were made to yield three different compressive strengths ranging from 40 to
65 MPa. The details of the mixtures are given in Table 2. The mixing time of these Mixtures was four
minutes. There was no rest period before the start of curing.

5.2 Stress-Strain Curves

70
Mixture 7

60

Mixture 8

Stress

50
40

Mixture 9

30
20
10
0
0

0.005

0.01

0.015

Strain
Figure 5. Stress-strain Relations of Geopolymer Concrete
In order to obtain the stress-strain curves in compression, tests were performed in a deformationcontrol testing machine. Figure 5 shows the measured stress-strain relations of fly ash-based

geopolymer concrete for various compressive strengths. The test data show that geopolymer concrete
with higher compressive strength tends to have higher modulus of elasticity.
In order to ascertain the fact that the stress-strain relation of geopolymer concrete is similar to that
of Portland cement concrete, an analytical model proposed by Collins et al [2] was used. The model,
which applies to both normal and high strength Portland cement concrete is given by :

c f cm

c
n
cm n 1 ( c cm ) nk

(1)

where:
fcm = peak stress
cm = strain at peak stress
n = 0.8 + (fcm/17)
k = 0.67 + (fcm/62) when c/cm>1
= 1.0 when c/cm1

70
Stress (MPa)

60
50

Measured

40
Equation 1

30
20
10
0
0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

Strain
Figure 6: Predicted and Test Stress-Strain Relations for Concrete made from Mixture 7

70
Stress (MPa)

60
50

Measured

40

Equation 1

30
20
10
0
0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

Strain
Figure 7: Predicted and Test Stress-Strain Relations for Concrete made from Mixture 8

Stress (MPa)

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Measured
Equation 1

0.005

0.01

0.015

Strain
Figure 8: Predicted and Test Stress-Strain Relations for Concrete made from Mixture 9

In Figures 6 to 8, the stress-strain relations predicted by Equation 1 are compared with the test
curves. The analytical curves were calculated by using the measured values of fcm and cm in Equation
1. This comparison reveals that the stress-strain relations of geopolymer concrete can be predicted by
using Equation 1 developed for Portland cement concretes. Earlier, the authors [7] have reported that
the modulus of elasticity, the Poissons ratio, and the tensile strength of fly ash-based geopolymer
concrete are similar to those of Portland cement concrete.

6 CONCLUSIONS
The paper reported the results of a study carried out on fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. The
following conclusions are drawn from this study:
a. Longer mixing time yielded lower slump of fresh concrete, and higher compressive strength
and higher density of hardened concrete (Figures 1 to 3). This suggests that the extended
mixing time resulted in better polymerisation process, and hence enhanced properties of
hardened concrete.
b. The term rest period is used to indicate the time taken from the end of casting to start of
curing at an elevated temperature. The compressive strength of specimens increased with a
rest period of one day or more after casting. The extent of strength gain is significant, in the
range of 20 to 50 percent compared to the compressive strength of specimens with no rest
period (Figure 4).
c. The measured stress-strain relations of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, both the
ascending and the descending parts, agree well with the predictions of Equation 1 developed
originally for Portland cement concrete (Figures 6 to 8).
d. Because the modulus of elasticity, the Poissons ratio, the tensile strength, and the stressstrain relations of geopolymer concrete are similar to those of Portland cement concrete, the
provisions of current codes and standards for concrete structures can be used to design fly
ash-based geopolymer concrete structures. The authors [10] earlier work on reinforced
geopolymer concrete columns also supports this conclusion.

7 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The first and second authors are recipient of the Australian Development Scholarship. The third
author is supported by the TPSDP Asian Development Bank. The authors express their gratitude to
Professor Stephen Foster of the University of New South Wales for his help in obtaining the test data
reported in Figures 6 to 8.

8 REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

7.

8.
9.

10.
11.

12.

Cheng, T. W. & J. P. Chiu (2003). "Fire-resistant Geopolymer Produced by Granulated Blast

Furnace Slag." Minerals Engineering 16(3): 205-210.
Collins, M. P., D. Mitchell & J. G. MacGregor (1993). "Structural Design Considerations for
High Strength Concrete." ACI Concrete International 15(5): 27-34.
Davidovits, J. (1999). Chemistry of Geopolymeric Systems, Terminology. Geopolymer '99
International Conference, France: 9-40.
Hardjito, D., S. E. Wallah, D. M. J. Sumajouw & B. V. Rangan (2003). Geopolymer Concrete:
Turn Waste Into Environmentally Friendly Concrete. International Conference on Recent
Trends in Concrete Technology and Structures (INCONTEST), I, Coimbatore, India, KCT:
129-140.
Hardjito, D., S. E. Wallah, D. M. J. Sumajouw & B. V. Rangan (2004). "On The Development
of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete." ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6, pp 467-472.
Hardjito, D., S. E. Wallah, D. M. J. Sumajouw & B. V. Rangan (2004). Properties of
Geopolymer Concrete with Fly Ash as Source Material: Effect of Mixture Composition.
Seventh CANMET/ACI International Conference on Recent Advances in Concrete
Technology, ACI SP 222-8, Las Vegas, USA: 109-118.
Hardjito, D., S.E. Wallah, D.M.J. Sumajouw & B.V. Rangan (2004). The Stress-Strain
Behaviour of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete. Development in Mechanics of Structures
& Materials, A.A. Balkema Publishers, pp. 831-834.
Hardjito, D., S.E. Wallah, D.M.J. Sumajouw & B.V. Rangan (2005). Fly Ash-Based
Geopolymer Concrete. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering. Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 77-85.
Palomo, A., A. Fernandez-Jimenez, C. Lopez-Hombrados & J. L. Lleyda (2004). Precast
Elements Made of Alkali-Activated Fly Ash Concrete. Eighth CANMET/ACI International
Conference on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag, and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete,
Supplementary Papers, Las Vegas, USA: 545-558.
Sumajouw, D. M. J., D. Hardjito, S. E. Wallah & B. V. Rangan (2004). Behaviour and Strength
of Geopolymer Concrete Column. ACMSM 18, Perth, Australia.
Wallah, S. E., D. Hardjito, D. M. J. Sumajouw & B. V. Rangan (2003). Sulfate Resistance of
Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete. The 21st Biennial Conference of The Concrete Institute
of Australia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Wallah, S. E., D. Hardjito, D. M. J. Sumajouw & B. V. Rangan (2004). Creep Behaviour of Fly
Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete. Seventh CANMET/ACI International Conference on
Recent Advances in Concrete Technology, Supplementary Papers, Las Vegas, USA: 49-60.