| Literature DB >> 34885264 |
Wei Yang1, Pinghua Zhu1, Hui Liu1, Xinjie Wang1, Wei Ge2, Minqi Hua3.
Abstract
Geopolymer binder is expected to be an optimum alternative to Portland cement due to its excellent engineering properties of high strength, acid corrosion resistance, low permeability, good chemical resistance, and excellent fire resistance. To study the sulfuric acid corrosion resistance of geopolymer concrete (GPC) with different binding materials and concentrations of sodium hydroxide solution (NaOH), metakaolin, high-calcium fly ash, and low-calcium fly ash were chosen as binding materials of GPC for the geopolymerization process. A mixture of sodium silicate solution (Na2SiO3) and NaOH solution with different concentrations (8 M and 12 M) was selected as the alkaline activator with a ratio (Na2SiO3/NaOH) of 1.5. GPC specimens were immersed in the sulfuric acid solution with the pH value of 1 for 6 days and then naturally dried for 1 day until 98 days. The macroscopic properties of GPC were characterized by visual appearance, compressive strength, mass loss, and neutralization depth. The materials were characterized by SEM, XRD, and FTIR. The results indicated that at the immersion time of 28 d, the compressive strength of two types of fly ash-based GPC increased to some extent due to the presence of gypsum, but this phenomenon was not observed in metakaolin-based GPC. After 98 d of immersion, the residual strength of fly ash based GPC was still higher, which reached more than 25 MPa, while the metakaolin-based GPC failed. Furthermore, due to the rigid 3D networks of aluminosilicate in fly ash-based GPC, the mass of all GPC decreased slightly during the immersion period, and then tended to be stable in the later period. On the contrary, in metakaolin-based GPC, the incomplete geopolymerization led to the compressive strength being too low to meet the application of practical engineering. In addition, the compressive strength of GPC activated by 12 M NaOH was higher than the GPC activated by 8 M NaOH, which is owing to the formation of gel depended on the concentration of alkali OH ion, low NaOH concentration weakened chemical reaction, and reduced compressive strength. Additionally, according to the testing results of neutralization depth, the neutralization depth of high-calcium fly ash-based GPC activated by 12 M NaOH suffered acid attack for 98 d was only 6.9 mm, which is the minimum value. Therefore, the best performance was observed in GPC prepared with high-calcium fly ash and 12 M NaOH solution, which is attributed to gypsum crystals that block the pores of the specimen and improve the microstructure of GPC, inhibiting further corrosion of sulfuric acid.Entities:
Keywords: alkali concentration; fly ash; geopolymer concrete; metakaolin; sulfuric acid corrosion
Year: 2021 PMID: 34885264 PMCID: PMC8658512 DOI: 10.3390/ma14237109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Chemical compositions of binding materials (wt.%).
| Chemical Compositions | SiO2 | Al2O3 | Fe2O3 | SO3 | TiO2 | CaO | K2O | MgO | Na2O | LOI a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class F fly ash | 44.94 | 32.15 | 5.14 | 2.07 | 1.49 | 9.90 | 1.13 | 1.04 | 0.81 | 1.33 |
| Class C fly ash | 44.18 | 26.92 | 9.34 | 1.53 | 1.34 | 11.02 | 1.39 | 1.88 | 1.29 | 1.11 |
| Metakaolin | 48.88 | 43.39 | 3.77 | 0.04 | 2.45 | 0.98 | 0.14 | - | - | 0.35 |
a LOI: Loss on ignition.
Proportions of mixtures (kg/m3).
| Mixes | Binding Materials | NA | Sand | NaOH | Na2SiO3 | Free Water | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class F | Class C | Metakaolin | 8 M | 12 M | |||||
| F-8 | 377 | - | - | 1150 | 500 | 108 | - | 162 | - |
| F-12 | 377 | - | - | 1150 | 500 | - | 108 | 162 | - |
| C-8 | 450 | 1150 | 500 | 108 | - | 162 | - | ||
| C-12 | 450 | 1150 | 500 | - | 108 | 162 | - | ||
| MK-8 | - | - | 399 | 1150 | 500 | 108 | 162 | 60 | |
| MK-12 | - | - | 399 | 1150 | 500 | 108 | 162 | 60 | |
Figure 1Preparation diagram of GPC.
Figure 2GPC after 0 day, 49 days, and 98 days of immersion in sulfuric acid solution.
Figure 3Neutralization depths of GPC.
Figure 4Neutralization depth of different GPCs exposed to sulfuric acid solution.
Figure 5Mass loss of different GPCs exposed to sulfuric acid solution.
Figure 6Compressive strength of GPC exposed to sulfuric acid solution.
Figure 7SEM images of GPC exposed to sulfuric acid solution for 0 (left) and 98 (right) days: (a) C-8; (b) C-12; (c) F-8; (d) F-12; (e) MK-8; (f) MK-12.
Figure 8XRD patterns of GPC exposed to sulfuric acid solution for: (a) 0 day; (b) 98 days. Q = quartz, Z = gismondite, C = calcite, G = gypsum.
Figure 9FTIR spectra of GPC exposed to sulfuric acid solution for: (a) 0 d; (b) 98 d.