Properties of Geopolymer Mortar Containing Waste Glass Aggregates and Glass Bubbles Student: Nurtay Kozhageldi Research Supervisor: Professor Chang-Seon Shon Outline Introduction Research Objectives Research Methodology Results and Discussion Conclusion Limitations and Recommendations References 2 Introduction 3 Figure 1. Sustainability definition Sustainability Economy Society Environment Environmentally friendly Cost-effective Accepted by people Introduction The demand for sand utilization increased by about 5-10%. Harm to the ecosystem, erosion of riverbanks, and water quality deterioration. Glass bottle waste accumulation in landfills. Cement is the source of about 5 to 7% of total carbon dioxide () emissions in the world. 4 Figure 2. Extraction of raw materials Figure 3. Glass bottle waste Introduction Waste glass sand: Glass is single use material, for example glass bottle. Glass is silica-rich material and has similar chemical composition and physical properties as sand. Concrete expansion due to the Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) between alkalis in cement and reactive silica in glass. 5 Figure 4. Glass bottle waste Introduction Glass bubble: Very lightweight white powder made from chemically stable soda-lime-borosilicate glass High crush strength, low thermal conductivity and low density. 6 Figure 5. Glass bubbles Introduction Geopolymer: Binder made up of aluminosilicate precursor and alkali activators. Depending on the type of precursor and alkali activator, up to 80% reduction of CO2 emission was observed when geopolymer concrete was used. Sustainable material. Fly ash (FA), Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS), Metakaolin (MK), Silica Fume (SF). Alkaline activators: NaOH, . 7 Introduction FA By-product generated from coal combustion plants for electricity and heat production. Produces less heat during the hydration and suppresses reactions in concrete which may help to reduce alkali-silica reactions Low calcium and high calcium FA 8 GGBFS By-product from steel-making processes or iron extraction from its ore in the blast furnace. Approximately 300 kg of slag is produced per ton of iron extracted. The chemical composition of GGBFS is same as OPC including compounds like lime, silica, and alumina. Figure 6. FA Figure 7. GGBFS Research Objectives To prove the efficiency of using waste glass sand (WGS) in geopolymer concrete for thermal insulation purposes To investigate whether geopolymer concrete can mitigate alkali-silica reaction (ASR) expansion for the mixture containing waste glass sand (WGS) To examine whether glass bubbles can decrease the thermal conductivity of the geopolymer concrete 9 Research Methodology NaOH AAS Coal combustion Steel processing FA GGBFS Glass bottles RS WGS Geopolymer mortar 10 (a) (b) Cementitious materials properties The specific gravities of FA and GGBFS are 1.87 and 2.99 respectively. Table 1. Chemical composition of FA and GGBFS (%). Figure 8. XRD of FA and GGBFS SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO SO3 MgO TiO2 Na2O K2O BaO MnO FA 62.75 23.87 3.85 1.78 0.29 0.51 1.06 0.50 1.30 0.11 0.07 GGBFS 33.52 11.63 0.31 30.93 2.50 11.29 1.25 0.45 1.28 - 0.35 Figure 9. PSD of FA and GGBFS 11 Fine aggregate properties Sieve # (size) Weight (%) #8 (2.36 mm) 10 #16 (1.18 mm) 25 #30 (600 μm) 25 #50 (300 μm) 25 #100 (150 μm) 15 Table 2. Gradation (%) of fine aggregates Figure 10. Jaw crusher 12 Fine aggregate properties Fine aggregate Specific gravity (SG) Absorption capacity (AC) RS 2.77 2.68 WGS 2.54 0.83 Table 3. SG and AC of fine aggregates SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO SO3 MgO TiO2 Na2O K2O BaO MnO RS 47.08 9.97 5.50 13.60 0.56 1.93 0.65 1.27 3.16 0.13 0.72 WGS 66.20 1.78 0.66 8.45 0.44 2.48 0.06 12.27 1.20 0.02 0.02 Table 4. Chemical composition of FA, GGBFS, and WGS (%). Figure 11. XRD of RS Figure 12. XRD of WGS 13 Mix Design   Table 5. Mixture Proportion of Geopolymer Mortar Mix Mix ID FA (%) GGBFS (%) Sand (%) WGS (%) Glass bubbles (%) AAS/b w/b 1A Control 1 60 40 100 0 0 0.4 0.35 1B Control 2 60 40 0 100 0 0.4 0.35 2A S85WGS15GB0 60 40 85 15 0 0.4 0.35 2B S70WGS30GB0 60 40 70 30 0 0.4 0.35 2C S55WGS45GB0 60 40 55 45 0 0.4 0.35 3A S85WGS15GB0 60 40 85 15 0 0.4 0.40 3B S70WGS30GB0 60 40 70 30 0 0.4 0.40 3C S55WGS45GB0 60 40 55 45 0 0.4 0.40 4A S85WGS15GB0 60 40 85 15 0 0.3 0.35 4B S70WGS30GB0 60 40 70 30 0 0.3 0.35 4C S55WGS45GB0 60 40 55 45 0 0.3 0.35 5A S80WGS15GB5 60 40 80 15 5 0.4 0.35 5B S77.5WGS15GB7.5 60 40 77.5 15 7.5 0.4 0.35 5C S65WGS30GB5 60 40 65 30 5 0.4 0.35 5D S62.5WGS30GB7.5 60 40 62.5 30 7.5 0.4 0.35   Note: AAS-alkali activator solution   Molarity of the NaOH is 10M Ratio of Na2SiO3 to NaOH is 1.5 Waste glass (15%, 30%, and 45%) and glass bubbles (5% and 7.5%) 14 Experimental Program 1. Mix Design   FA/GGBFS Activator (NaOH, Na2SiO3) Water to binder ratio Normal river sand Waste glass sand Glass bubbles 2. Evaluation     Hardened Properties Material Characterization Fresh Properties Durability 1) Hardened density 2) Compressive strength 3) Modulus of rupture 4) Thermal conductivity 5) Dielectric constant 6) Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity 1) Particle size distribution 2) Mineralogical analysis: X-ray diffraction (XRD) 3) Chemical composition analysis: X-ray fluorescence (XRF) 4) Microstructure analysis: Scanning electron microscope (SEM) 5) Aggregate properties 3. Test Result Analysis 1) Workability 2) Fresh density 3) Air content 1) Alkali-silica reaction (ASR) 2) Drying shrinkage 4. Documentation 15 Figure 13. Experimental program Research Methodology 16 Table 6. Samples’ testing plan Test name Test methods Testing ages No. of samples Sample dimensions ASR ASTM C1567 3- and 4- day interval 4 25x25x285 Drying shrinkage ASTM C596 3- and 4- day interval 4 25x25x285 Compressive strength ASTM C109 7/14/28 day 12 50x50x50 Flexural strength ASTM C348 7/14/28 day 12 40x40x160 Thermal conductivity ASTM E1530 7/14/28 day 3 150x150x30 Dielectric constant   3- and 4- day interval 2 70x70x70 Ultrasonic pulse velocity ASTM C597 7/14/28 day 4 50x50x50 Hardened density ASTM C642 7/14/28 day 4 50x50x50 Results and Discussion: Fresh density Figure 14. Fresh density 17 (a) (b) (c) (d) Results and Discussion: Flowability Figure 15. Flowability 18 (a) (b) Results and Discussion: Air content Figure 16. Air content 19 (a) (b) (c) (d) Results and Discussion: Compressive Strength Fig. 17. Compressive strength 20 (a) (c) (b) (d) Results and Discussion: Flexural Strength Fig. 18. Flexural strength 21 (a) (b) (c) (d) Results and Discussion: Thermal conductivity Figure 19. Thermal conductivity 22 (a) (b) (c) (d) Results and Discussion: UPV Figure 20. UPV 23 (a) (b) (c) (d) Results and Discussion: Dielectric constant Figure 21. Dielectric constant 24 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Results and Discussion: ASR Expansion Figure 22. ASR test 25 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Results and Discussion: Drying Shrinkage Figure 23. Drying shrinkage 26 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Results and Discussion: Summary Figure 25. Summary 27 Compressive strength Flexural strength Thermal conductivity UPV Dielectric constant ASR expansion Drying shrinkage Group 1 (C1 C2) OK Group 2 (partial WGS) OK Group 3 (w/b increase) OK Group 4 (ASS/b decrease) OK Group 5 (GB addition) OK Conclusion The high glass content caused detrimental result on the strength growth, but the partial replacement of RS by WGS increased the strength of the mortar compared to the mortar without WGS. The partial replacement by WGS decreases the drying shrinkage and thermal conductivity of the geopolymer mortar even though the w/b and AAS/b were changing. The rise of the w/b ratio in the geopolymer mixture declines the strength and increases the drying shrinkage, but it enhances the thermal insulation properties. The application of the glass bubbles reduced the strength and increased the thermal conductivity even though it was expected that the conductivity will decrease. All geopolymer mortars have low expansion due to the ASR despite aggregate replacement by WGS and glass bubbles, AAS concentration, and water content change. Therefore, the application of the FA and GGBFS helps to mitigate the expansion behavior. Application of geopolymer helps to reduce ASR because part of the reactive silica from aggregates is consumed during the alkali activation process 28 Limitations and Recommendations Only 1 curing method was used (air curing at room temperature). One combination of FA and GGBFS was used. Response surface method (RSM) can be used to determine optimum mix combination. It is recommended to conduct Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy tests to evaluate the phases and compounds in microstructure of mortar samples. Further investigation of glass bubble is required. 29 References al Bakri, A. M. M., Kamarudin, H., Bnhussain, M., Khairul Nizar, I., Rafiza, A. R., Zarina, Y., Mustafa, A. M., Bakri, A., & al Bakri, A. M. M. (2012). THE PROCESSING, CHARACTERIZATION, AND PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH BASED GEOPOLYMER CONCRETE. Chen, W., Shen, P., & Shui, Z. (2012). Determination of water content in fresh concrete mix based on relative dielectric constant measurement. Construction and Building Materials, 34, 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.02.073 Cong, P., & Cheng, Y. (2021). Advances in geopolymer materials: A comprehensive review. In Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition) (Vol. 8, Issue 3, pp. 283–314). Chang’an University. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2021.03.004 Dineshkumar, M., & Umarani, C. (2020). Effect of Alkali Activator on the Standard Consistency and Setting Times of Fly Ash and GGBS-Based Sustainable Geopolymer Pastes. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2593207 Du, H., & Tan, K. H. (2014). Effect of particle size on alkali-silica reaction in recycled glass mortars. Construction and Building Materials, 66, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.05.092 Figueira, R. B., Sousa, R., Coelho, L., Azenha, M., de Almeida, J. M., Jorge, P. A. S., & Silva, C. J. R. (2019). Alkali-silica reaction in concrete: Mechanisms, mitigation and test methods. In Construction and Building Materials (Vol. 222, pp. 903–931). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.230 Hassan, A., Arif, M., & Shariq, M. (2019). Use of geopolymer concrete for a cleaner and sustainable environment – A review of mechanical properties and microstructure. In Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 223, pp. 704–728). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.051 He, Z., Zhu, X., Wang, J., Mu, M., & Wang, Y. (2019). Comparison of CO 2 emissions from OPC and recycled cement production. Construction and Building Materials, 211, 965–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.289 Khan, M. N. N., & Sarker, P. K. (2020). Effect of waste glass fine aggregate on the strength, durability and high temperature resistance of alkali-activated fly ash and GGBFS blended mortar. Construction and Building Materials, 263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120177 Lima, L., Trindade, E., Alencar, L., Alencar, M., & Silva, L. (2021). Sustainability in the construction industry: A systematic review of the literature. In Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 289). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125730 Oreshkin, D., Semenov, V., & Rozovskaya, T. (2016). Properties of Light-weight Extruded Concrete with Hollow Glass Microspheres. Procedia Engineering, 153, 638–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.214 Salim, M. U., & Mosaberpanah, M. A. (2022). The mechanism of alkali-aggregate reaction in concrete/mortar and its mitigation by using geopolymer materials and mineral admixtures: a comprehensive review. In European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering (Vol. 26, Issue 14, pp. 6766–6806). Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2021.1960899 Shahedan, N. F., Abdullah, M. M. A. B., Mahmed, N., Kusbiantoro, A., Tammas-Williams, S., Li, L. Y., Aziz, I. H., Vizureanu, P., Wysłocki, J. J., Błoch, K., & Nabiałek, M. (2021). Properties of a new insulation material glass bubble in geo-polymer concrete. Materials, 14(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14040809 Xu, G., & Shi, X. (2018a). Characteristics and applications of fly ash as a sustainable construction material: A state-of-the-art review. In Resources, Conservation and Recycling (Vol. 136, pp. 95–109). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.010 30 Thank You! 31 image1.png image2.png image4.png image3.png image5.png image6.png image7.jpg image8.jpg image9.jpg image10.png image10.jpeg image11.jpeg image19.jpg image20.jpeg image21.jpeg image18.png image22.png image23.png image12.jpg image13.jpg image14.jpg image15.jpg image16.jpg image17.jpg image18.jpeg image24.emf #325#200#100#50#300204060801000,11101001000Cumulative Percent Passing (%)Particle Size (μm)GGBFSFA47%45μm image25.emf 010203040506070Intensity (Counts)2θ(degree)MullitePotassium aluminateCalciteAnhydriteGGBFSFA image26.jpeg image27.emf 010203040506070Intensity (Counts)2θ(degree) image28.emf 010203040506070Intensity (Counts)2θ(degree)QuartzCalciteStrontium Zinc Fluoride image29.png image30.png image31.png image32.png image33.png image34.png image35.png image36.png image37.png image38.png image46.svg 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 w/b=0.35 15%WGS w/b=0.35 30%WGS w/b=0.35 45%WGS w/b=0.4 15%WGS w/b=0.4 30%WGS w/b=0.4 45%WGS Compressive strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 7-day 14-day 28-day image39.png image40.svg 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS 15%WGS 5%GB 15%WGS 7.5%GB 30%WGS 5%GB 30%WGS 7.5%GB Compressive strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image41.png image42.svg 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 AAS/b=0.4 15%WGS AAS/b=0.4 30%WGS AAS/b=0.4 45%WGS AAS/b=0.3 15%WGS AAS/b=0.3 30%WGS AAS/b=0.3 45%WGS Compressive strength (MPa) Mixtures w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image43.png image44.svg 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0%WGS 100%WGS Compressive strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image45.png image54.svg 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS 15%WGS 5%GB 15%WGS 7.5%GB 30%WGS 5%GB 30%WGS 7.5%GB Flexural strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image47.png image48.svg 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0%WGS 100%WGS Flexural strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image49.png image50.svg 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 w/b=0.35 15%WGS w/b=0.35 30%WGS w/b=0.35 45%WGS w/b=0.4 15%WGS w/b=0.4 30%WGS w/b=0.4 45%WGS Flexural strength (MPa) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 7-day 14-day 28-day image51.png image52.svg 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 AAS/b=0.4 15%WGS AAS/b=0.4 30%WGS AAS/b=0.4 45%WGS AAS/b=0.3 15%WGS AAS/b=0.3 30%WGS AAS/b=0.3 45%WGS Flexural strength (MPa) Mixtures w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image53.png image62.svg 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 AAS/b=0.4 15%WGS AAS/b=0.4 30%WGS AAS/b=0.4 45%WGS AAS/b=0.3 15%WGS AAS/b=0.3 30%WGS AAS/b=0.3 45%WGS Thermal conductivity (W/mK) Mixtures w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image55.png image56.svg 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0%WGS 100%WGS Thermal conductivity (W/mK) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image57.png image58.svg 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 w/b=0.35 15%WGS w/b=0.35 30%WGS w/b=0.35 45%WGS w/b=0.4 15%WGS w/b=0.4 30%WGS w/b=0.4 45%WGS Thermal conductivity (W/mK) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 7-day 14-day 28-day image59.png image60.svg 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS 15%WGS 5%GB 15%WGS 7.5%GB 30%WGS 5%GB 30%WGS 7.5%GB Thermal conductivity (W/mK) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image61.png image70.svg 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 AAS/b=0.4 15%WGS AAS/b=0.4 30%WGS AAS/b=0.4 45%WGS AAS/b=0.3 15%WGS AAS/b=0.3 30%WGS AAS/b=0.3 45%WGS UPV (m/s) Mixtures w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image63.png image64.svg 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0%WGS 100%WGS UPV (m/s) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image65.png image66.svg 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 w/b=0.35 15%WGS w/b=0.35 30%WGS w/b=0.35 45%WGS w/b=0.4 15%WGS w/b=0.4 30%WGS w/b=0.4 45%WGS UPV (m/s) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 7-day 14-day 28-day image67.png image68.svg 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS 15%WGS 5%GB 15%WGS 7.5%GB 30%WGS 5%GB 30%WGS 7.5%GB UPV (m/s) Mixtures AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 7-day 14-day 28-day image69.png image78.svg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Electric permittivity (er) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.3 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image79.png image80.svg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Electric permittivity (er) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS + 5%GB 15%WGS + 7.5%GB 30%WGS + 5%GB 30%WGS + 7.5%GB image71.png image72.svg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Electric permittivity (er) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 0%WGS 100%WGS image73.png image74.svg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Electric permittivity (er) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image75.png image76.svg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Electric permittivity (er) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.4 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image77.png image88.svg -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Expansion (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.3 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image89.png image90.svg -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Expansion (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS + 5%GB 15%WGS + 7.5%GB 30%WGS + 5%GB 30%WGS + 7.5%GB image81.png image82.svg -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Expansion (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 0%WGS 100%WGS image83.png image84.svg -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Expansion (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image85.png image86.svg -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Expansion (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.4 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image87.png image98.svg -2.4 -2.2 -2.0 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Length change (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.3 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image99.png image100.svg -2.4 -2.2 -2.0 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Length change (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS + 5%GB 15%WGS + 7.5%GB 30%WGS + 5%GB 30%WGS + 7.5%GB image91.png image92.svg -2.4 -2.2 -2.0 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Length change (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 0%WGS 100%WGS image93.png image94.svg -2.4 -2.2 -2.0 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Length change (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.35 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image95.png image96.svg -2.4 -2.2 -2.0 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Length change (%) Time (Days) AAS/b=0.4 and w/b=0.4 15%WGS 30%WGS 45%WGS image97.png