Durability Studies of Conventional Cement Concrete and Geopolymer Concrete

Abstract:

The service life of structural members is significantly impacted by the durability of the concrete and that they are made of. The embedded reinforcing steel in durable concrete is protected from corrosion, and the possibility of concrete spalling in the concrete as a result of chemical attack is reduced. This study investigates the effectiveness of geopolymer concretes prepared using fly ash or a mixture of fly ash and slag (SLG). The performance of OPC concrete is likewise evaluated for comparing the durability of geopolymer concretes. This is done in order to compare the two types of concrete. All of the prepared specimens were submerged in theee types of distinct solutions up to 9 months. Four different types of solutions are (i) sodium chloride with 5% concentration, (ii) sodium sulphate 5% concentration, (iii) combination of magnesium sulphate with sodium sulphate with 5% concentration both, and sulphuric acid 3% concentration. The variation in properties were evaluated throughout the duration of the exposure period. According to the findings, it has been demonstrated that Na₂SO₄ (sodium sulphate) has the most significant effect on the geopolymer concretes, whereas sulphuric acid has the greatest potential to break down OPC concrete. With the effect of sulfuric acid, the strength reduction was 26.57% for OPC concrete and where as for flyash & SLG concretes it is 10.87% & 7.26% respectively. According to the findings, the durability performance of geopolymer concrete is, in general, better to that of cement concrete.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 1116)
• Pages: 97-103
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-o39dkM
• Online since: March 2024
• Authors: Lakshmi Vara Prasad Meesaraganda*, Endow Ayar Mazumder, L. Ramaprasad Reddy
• Keywords: Durability, Flyash, Geopolymer Concrete, Slag (SLG)

References

[1] E.F. Irassar, A. Di Maio, O.R. Batic, Sulfate attack on concrete with mineral admixtures, Cem. Concr. Res. 26 (1) (1996) 113–123.

DOI: 10.1016/0008-8846(95)00195-6

[2] K. Tosun-Felekog˘lu, The effect of C3A content on sulfate durability of Portland limestone cement mortars, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 437–447.

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.091

[3] E. Rozière, A. Loukili, R. El Hachem, F. Grondin, Durability of concrete exposed to leaching and external sulphate attacks, Cem. Concr. Res. 39 (2009) 1188–1198.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.07.021

[4] C. Shi, P.V. Krivenko, D. Roy, Alkali-Activated Cements and Concretes, Taylor & Francis, 2006. I0:0-415-70004-3,376.

DOI: 10.4324/9780203390672

[5] Mehrzad Mohabbi Yadollahi, Ramazan Demirboga, Riza Polat, Majid Atashafrazeh, Behavior Investigation of NAOH Activated Pumice-Based Geopolymer Composites Exposed to Elevated Temperature, Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2(2), (2013) 137-142.

[6] A. Islam, U.J. Alengaram, M.Z. Jumaat, I.I. Bashar, S.M.A. Kabir, Engineering properties and carbon footprint of ground granulated blast-furnace slag-palm oil fuel ash-based structural geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 503–521.

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.026

[7] M. Albitar, P. Visintin, M.S. Mohamed Ali, O. Lavigne, E. Gamboa, Bond slip models for uncorroded and corroded steel reinforcement in class-F fly ash geopolymer concrete, (ASCE), J. Mater. Civ. Eng. (2016).

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001713

[8] Kumar S, Pradeepa J and Ravindra P M, Experimental Investigations on Optimal Strength Parameters of Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Concrete, Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res., Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2(2), (2013) 143-152.

DOI: 10.26634/jste.1.4.2138

[9] O.A. Hodhod, G. Salama, Simulation of expansion in cement based materials subjected to external sulfate attack, Ain. Shams. Eng. J. 5 (1) (2014) 7–15.

DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2013.05.002

[10] A.M. Ramezanianpour, D.R. Hooton, Sulfate resistance of Portland-limestone cements in combination with supplementary cementitious materials, Mater. Struct. 46 (2013) 1061–1073.

DOI: 10.1617/s11527-012-9953-8

[11] E.K. Attiogbe, S.H. Rizkalla, Response of concrete to sulfuric acid attack, ACI Mater. J. 481–488 (1987).

[12] A.P. Joseph, J. Keller, H. Bustamante, P.L. Bond, Surface neutralization and H2S oxidation at early stages of sewer corrosion: influence of temperature, relative humidity and H2S concentration, Water Res. 46 (13) (2012) 4235–4245.

DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.05.011

[13] O.A. Hodhod, G. Salama, Simulation of expansion in cement based materials subjected to external sulfate attack, Ain. Shams. Eng. J. 5 (1) (2014) 7–15

DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2013.05.002

[14] H. Yuan, P. Dangla, P. Chatellier, T. Chaussadent, Degradation modelling of concrete submitted to sulfuric acid attack, Cem. ASTM C 642–06, Standard test method for density, absorption, and voids in hardened concrete, ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, United States, 2008. Concr. Res. 53 (2013) 267–277.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2013.08.002