STM Journals Peer-reviewed research from Consortium e-Learning Network

Journal of Polymer & Composites Original Research Special issue Open Access

Multi-Objective Optimization of Geopolymer Cement Block Parameters Using Bentonite and Fly Ash

  1. Bagirisoko Edison Department of Civil Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram
  2. M. Achyutha Kumar Reddy Department of Civil Engineering, Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai
  3. V. Sree Lakshmi Department of Civil Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram

Abstract

Presently, geopolymer blocks are being produced by using industrial by-products like fly ash. This study focuses on the development of geopolymer cement blocks using the composition of bentonite and fly ash. The specific objective is to examine and optimize the geopolymer cement block parameters using a novel composition. The oxide ratio, alkali activator ratio, and molarity are considered variables. In contrast, the responses are considered as flow table, fresh density, compressive strength, compressive strength - temperature curing, density and water absorption. The mix matrix design was generated upon fixing the lower and upper limits of variables using response surface methodology (RSM). The laboratory experiments were conducted as per the mix matrix design to obtain the responses. The RSM model was developed using the values of responses for all mixes; analysis was also performed to verify the significance. It was found that all terms in the model were significant, showing a confidence level of more than 85 per cent. Furthermore, multi-objective optimization was also performed for the specified variables with a desirability of 1.0. At the outset, the development of geopolymer cement blocks was confirmed.

Keywords

References (40)

  1. Sharma A, Singh P, Kapoor K. Effect of GGBS on Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Mortar at Ambient and Heat Curing. Macromolecular Symposia. 2023;410(1). doi:10.1002/masy.202100321
  2. Turner LK, Collins FG. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: A comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Construction and Building Materials. 2013;43:125-130. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.023
  3. Gao X, Yu QL, Brouwers HJH. Characterization of alkali activated slag–fly ash blends containing nano-silica. Construction and Building Materials. 2015;98:397-406. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.08.086
  4. Lee WKW, van Deventer JSJ. The effect of ionic contaminants on the early-age properties of alkali-activated fly ash-based cements. Cement and Concrete Research. 2002;32(4):577-584. doi:10.1016/s0008-8846(01)00724-4
  5. Palomo A, Grutzeck MW, Blanco MT. Alkali-activated fly ashes. Cement and Concrete Research. 1999;29(8):1323-1329. doi:10.1016/s0008-8846(98)00243-9
  6. Karolina R, Tarigan J, Hardjasaputra H, Silalahi RAD. Analysis of Geopolymer Mortar Compressive Strength Based on Fly Ash and GGBFS as Patch Repair Material. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2023;1195(1):012032. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1195/1/012032
  7. Vijay C, Achyutha Kumar Reddy M. Optimization of bentonite modified cement mortar parameters at elevated temperatures using RSM. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2021;1197(1):012040. doi:10.1088/1757-899x/1197/1/012040
  8. Jo M, Soto L, Arocho M, St John J, Hwang S. Optimum mix design of fly ash geopolymer paste and its use in pervious concrete for removal of fecal coliforms and phosphorus in water. Construction and Building Materials. 2015;93:1097-1104. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.034
  9. Singh N, Kumar P, Goyal P. Reviewing the behaviour of high volume fly ash based self compacting concrete. Journal of Building Engineering. 2019;26:100882. doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100882
  10. Tian Z, Tang X, Xiu Z, Zhou H, Xue Z. The mechanical properties improvement of environmentally friendly fly ash-based geopolymer mortar using bio-mineralization. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022;332:130020. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130020
  11. Latawiec R, Woyciechowski P, Kowalski K. Sustainable Concrete Performance—CO2-Emission. Environments. 2018;5(2):27. doi:10.3390/environments5020027
  12. Achyutha Kumar Reddy M, Department of Civil Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram, Guntur, India-522502, Ranga Rao V, Naga Chaitanya K, Khed VC. Optimization of Bentocrete parameters using Response Surface Methodology (RSM). AIMS Materials Science. 2021;8(2):221-246. doi:10.3934/matersci.2021015
  13. Afzal S, Shahzada K, Fahad M, Saeed S, Ashraf M. Assessment of early-age autogenous shrinkage strains in concrete using bentonite clay as internal curing technique. Construction and Building Materials. 2014;66:403-409. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.05.051
  14. Shabab ME, Shahzada K, Gencturk B, Ashraf M, Fahad M. Synergistic effect of fly ash and bentonite as partial replacement of cement in mass concrete. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2016;20(5):1987-1995. doi:10.1007/s12205-015-0166-x
  15. Taklymi SMQ, Rezaifar O, Gholhaki M. Investigating the properties of bentonite and kaolin modified concrete as a partial substitute to cement. SN Applied Sciences. 2020;2(12). doi:10.1007/s42452-020-03380-z
  16. -I. I. I. M. Reviews, “Yearbook 2015,” vol. 2015, no. 0712, 2017.
  17. Mirza J, Riaz M, Naseer A, Rehman F, Khan AN, Ali Q. Pakistani bentonite in mortars and concrete as low cost construction material. Applied Clay Science. 2009;45(4):220-226. doi:10.1016/j.clay.2009.06.011
  18. Khushnood RA, Rizwan SA, Memon SA, Tulliani JM, Ferro GA. Experimental Investigation on Use of Wheat Straw Ash and Bentonite in Self-Compacting Cementitious System. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering. 2014;2014:1-11. doi:10.1155/2014/832508
  19. Achyutha Kumar Reddy and V. Ranga Rao, “Utilization of bentonite in concrete: A review,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 7, no. 6C2, pp. 541–545, 2019.
  20. Amin M, Sudibyo S, Birawidha DC, Rinovian A, Erlangga BD, Al Muttaqqi M, et al. Effect of bentonite on fly ash and bottom ash based engineered geopolymer composite. Riset Geologi dan Pertambangan. 2023;33(1). doi:10.55981/risetgeotam.2023.1225
  21. Davidovits, “Geopolymers: Ceramic-like inorganic polymers,” J. Ceram. Sci. Technol., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 335–350, 2017, doi:10.4416/JCST2017-00038.
  22. Harmaji A, Imran AM, Sunendar B, Lazuardi MS, Khairunnasari I, Sobandi A. Effect of air-cooled slag and granulated blast furnace slag addition as substitutor on fly ash based geopolymer. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2017;1887:020019. doi:10.1063/1.5003502
  23. Dong M, Elchalakani M, Karrech A. Curing Conditions of Alkali-Activated Fly Ash and Slag Mortar. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. 2020;32(6). doi:10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0003233
  24. Duxson P, Provis JL, Lukey GC, van Deventer JSJ. The role of inorganic polymer technology in the development of ‘green concrete’. Cement and Concrete Research. 2007;37(12):1590-1597. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.08.018
  25. Hosseini S, Brake NA, Nikookar M, Günaydın-Şen Ö, Snyder HA. Mechanochemically activated bottom ash-fly ash geopolymer. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2021;118:103976. doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.103976
  26. Lyu S, Xiao J, Singh A, Ye T. The influence of recycled aggregate on the properties of geopolymeric recycled concrete: A comprehensive review. Journal of Asian Concrete Federation. 2023;9(2):33-49. doi:10.18702/acf.2023.9.2.33
  27. Saloma, Saggaff A, Hanafiah, Mawarni A. Geopolymer Mortar with Fly Ash. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2016;78:01026. doi:10.1051/matecconf/20167801026
  28. Brough AR, Holloway M, Sykes J, Atkinson A. Sodium silicate-based alkali-activated slag mortars. Cement and Concrete Research. 2000;30(9):1375-1379. doi:10.1016/s0008-8846(00)00356-2
  29. Hardjito D, Cheak CC, Lee Ing CH. Strength and Setting Times of Low Calcium Fly Ash-based Geopolymer Mortar. Modern Applied Science. 2008;2(4). doi:10.5539/mas.v2n4p3
  30. Chindaprasirt P, Chalee W. Effect of sodium hydroxide concentration on chloride penetration and steel corrosion of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete under marine site. Construction and Building Materials. 2014;63:303-310. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.010
  31. Man X, Aminul Haque M, Chen B. Engineering properties and microstructure analysis of magnesium phosphate cement mortar containing bentonite clay. Construction and Building Materials. 2019;227:116656. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.08.037
  32. Davidovits, “Global Warming Impact on the Cement and Aggregates Industries,” vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 263–278, 1994.
  33. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Technometrics. 2006;48(1):158-158. doi:10.1198/tech.2006.s372
  34. Khed VC, Mohammed BS, Liew MS, Abdullah Zawawi NAW. Development of response surface models for self-compacting hybrid fibre reinforced rubberized cementitious composite. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;232:117191. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117191
  35. Mohammed BS, Liew MS, Alaloul WS, Khed VC, Hoong CY, Adamu M. Properties of nano-silica modified pervious concrete. Case Studies in Construction Materials. 2018;8:409-422. doi:10.1016/j.cscm.2018.03.009
  36. Ferdosian I, Camões A. Eco-efficient ultra-high performance concrete development by means of response surface methodology. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2017;84:146-156. doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.08.019
  37. VC Khed, V Pesaralanka, M Adamu, YE Ibrahim, M Azab, M Reddy, Ahmad Hakamy, Ahmed Farouk Deifalla., “Optimization of graphene oxide incorporated in fly ash-based self-compacting concrete” Buildings, Vol 12 (11), pp1-18, 2022.
  38. Narender Reddy A, Meena T. An experimental investigation on mechanical behaviour of eco - friendly concrete. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2017;263:032010. doi:10.1088/1757-899x/263/3/032010
  39. International, “iTeh Standards iTeh Standards Document,” vol. 10, no. Reapproved, pp. 1–5, 2021, doi:10.1520/C0033.
  40. Adamu M, Haruna SI, Ibrahim YE, Alanazi H. Evaluation of the mechanical performance of concrete containing calcium carbide residue and nano silica using response surface methodology. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022;29(44):67076-67102. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-20546-x
Support