Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry Studies with Geopolymers

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Indian Geotechnical Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study examines the role of micro-structure on the compressive strengths of geopolymers using mercury intrusion porosimetry technique. Geopolymers were synthesized from pozzolanas such as, class-F fly ash, kaolinite, metakaolinite, ground granulated blast furnace slag and red soil. Geopolymer reactions were accomplished by alkali activation of the pozzolanas using 10 M NaOH solution at 100 °C for 7-days. The geopolymers exhibited tri-modal nature of pores i.e., macro-pore mode (entrance pore radius: 25–5000 nm), meso-pore mode (entrance pore radius: 1.25–25 nm) and air void mode (entrance pore radius >5000 nm). The micro pores (entrance pore radius <1.25 nm) do not contribute to porosity of the geopolymers. The fly ash geopolymer exhibited largest total intruded volume (0.3908 cm3/g), while the red soil geopolymer exhibited the least intruded volume (0.0416 cm3/g). Interestingly, geopolymers with higher intruded volumes were characterized by larger compressive strengths. The experimental results also indicated that geopolymers with larger air voids + macro pores volume exhibited superior compressive strength; the results imply that geopolymers which develop an open microstructure during polymerization are characterized by larger compressive strength, possibly from stronger bond formation in the silico aluminate structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hardjito D, Rangan BV (2005) Development and properties of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Research Report GC1, Perth, Australia, Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of Technology

  2. McCaffrey R (2002) Climate change and the cement industry. Global Cement and Lime Magazine (Environmental special Issue), pp 15–19

  3. Davidovits J (1994) Global warming impact on the cement and aggregates industries. World Resour Rev 6:263–278

    Google Scholar 

  4. Daniel K, Jay S, Kwesi S (2007) Comparative performance of geopolymers made with metakaolin and fly ash after exposure to elevated temperatures. J Cem Concr Res 37:1583–1589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Davidovits J (1991) Geopolymers: inorganic polymeric new materials. J Therm Anal 37:1633–1656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Duxson P, Fernandez-Jimenez A, Provis JL, Palomo GCA, Van Deventer JSJ (2007) Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art. J Mater Sci 42:2917–2933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Komnitsas K, Zaharaki D (2007) Geopolymerization: a review and prospects for the minerals industry. J Miner Eng 20:1261–1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Andini S, Cioffi R, Colangelo F, Montagnaro F, Santoro L (2008) Adsorption of chlorophenol, chloroaniline and methylene blue on fuel oil fly ash. J Hazard Mater 157:599–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bakharev T (2005) Geopolymer materials prepared using class F fly ash and elevated temperature curing. J Cem Concr Res 35(6):1224–1232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Slavik R, Bednarik V, Vondruska M, Nemec A (2008) Preparation of geopolymer from fluidized bed combustion bottom ash. J Mater Process Technol 200:265–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rattanasak U, Chindaprasirt P (2009) Influence of NaOH solution on the synthesis of fly ash geopolymer. J Miner Eng 22:1073–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Winnefeld F, Leemann A, Lucuk M, Svoboda P, Neuroth M (2010) Assessment of phase formation in alkali activated low and high calcium fly ashes in building materials. J Constr Build Mater 24(6):1086–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Xu H, Van Deventer JSJ (2000) The geopolymerisation of alumino-silicate minerals. Int J Miner Process 59(3):247–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Xu H, van Deventer JSJ (2002) Geopolymerisation of multiple minerals. J Miner Eng 15(12):1131–1139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Van Jaarsveld JGS, van Deventer JSJ, Lukey GC (2002) The effect of composition and temperature on the properties of fly ash- and kaolinite-based geopolymers. J Chem Eng 89(1–3):63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lloyd N, Rangan V (2009) Geopolymer concrete; sustainable cement less concrete. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACI international conference on recent advances in concrete technology and sustainability issues, Seville, ACI SP-261, pp 33–54

  17. Provis JL, Rose V, Winarski RP, Van Deventer JSJ (2011) Hard X-ray nanotomography of amorphous aluminosilicate cements. Scr Mater 65(4):316–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Provis JL, Myers RJ, White CE, Rose V, Van Deventer JSJ (2012) X-ray microtomography shows pore structure and tortuosity in alkali-activated binders. J Cem Concr Res 42(6):855–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ma H (2014) Mercury intrusion porosimetry in concrete technology: tips in measurement, pore structure parameter acquisition and application. J Porous Mater 21:207–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ye G (2003) The microstructure and permeability of cementitious materials. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft

  21. Galle C (2001) Effect of drying on cement-based materials pore structure as identified by mercury intrusion porosimetry—a comparative study between oven-, vacuum-, and freeze-drying. J Cem Concr Res 31:1467–1477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. ISO 15901-1 (2005) Evaluation of pore size distribution and porosimetry of solid materials by mercury porosimetry and gas adsorption, part 1: mercury porosimetry. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, pp 6–9

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rouquerol J, Baron G, Denoyel R, Giesche H, Groen J, Klobes P (2012) Liquid intrusion and alternative methods for the characterization of macro porous materials (IUPAC Technical Report). J Pure Appl Chem 84:107–136

    Google Scholar 

  24. IS 1727 (1999) Methods of tests for pozzolanic materials. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  25. IS 2720 Part III, sec I (1980) Methods of test for soils: part 3: determination of specific gravity—fine grained soils. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  26. IS 2720 Part 4 (1985) Methods of test for soils: grain size analysis. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  27. IS 2720 Part 26 (1987). Methods of test for soils: determination of pH value. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  28. IS 2720 Part 21 (1977) Methods of test for soils: determination of total soluble solids. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  29. Todd DK (1980) Groundwater hydrology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rao SM, Acharya IP (2014) Synthesis and characterization of fly ash geopolymer sand. ASCE J Mater Civil Eng 26:912–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hoffman GK, Jones GE (2005) Availability of coal resources in the Vermejo and Raton formations, Raton coalfield, Raton Basin, northeast New Mexico, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources Open-file report 490

  32. Ward RC, French D (2006) Determination of glass content and estimation of glass composition in fly ash using quantitative X-ray diffractrometry. J Fuel 85(16):2268–2277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ward RC, French D (2005) Relation between coal and fly ash mineralogy based on quantitative XRD methods. In: World of coal ash Conference (WOCA), April 11–15, Lexington, KY, USA

  34. Kolay PK, Singh DN (2001) Physical, chemical, mineralogical and thermal properties of cenosphere from an ash lagoon. J Cem Concr Res 31:539–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bagchi SN (1951) Minerals present in hydrogen clays from Indians soils, kaolins and bentonites. Bull Indian Soc Soil Sci 6:19–41

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ghosh SK, Das SC (1963) Nature of minerals in the soil clays of some red soils of Ranchi. J Indian Soc Soil Sci 11:69–72

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sinha MK, Mandal SC (1963) A mineralogical study of some acidic red loam soils of Chotanagpur. J Indian Soc Soil Sci 11:329–332

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lefebvre G, Delage P (1986) The use of mercury intrusion porosimetry for the analysis of clay microstructure. In: Balasubramanian AS, Chandra S, Bergado DT (eds) Recent developments in laboratory and field and analysis of geo-technical problems, Bangkok. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 31–43

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank DST-FIST Program, Government of India for funding the MIP equipment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 566012, India

    Sudhakar M. Rao & Indra Prasad Acharya

Authors
  1. Sudhakar M. Rao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Indra Prasad Acharya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sudhakar M. Rao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rao, S.M., Acharya, I.P. Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry Studies with Geopolymers. Indian Geotech J 47, 495–502 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0245-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0245-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation