4.7 Article

Geopolymer binders from metakaolin using sodium waterglass from waste glass and rice husk ash as alternative activators: A comparative study

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 114, Issue -, Pages 276-289

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.184

Keywords

Rice husk ash; Waste glass; Sodium hydroxide; Sodium waterglass; Metakaolin; Geopolymer binders; Microstructural properties

Funding

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in Institut fur Mineralogie, Leibniz Universitat Hannover, Germany [KAM/1155741 STP]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rice husk and waste glass from sources in Cameroon were used for producing sodium waterglass (NWG) solution denoted S1 and S2 respectively as alternative activators to prepare metakaolin-based geopolymer binder. Metakaolin-based geopolymer binders (G1, G2) were obtained using freshly prepared NWG with a mass ratio NWG/MK = 0.83. The IR spectra of S1, S2 using ATR and KBr methods show the presence of SiQ(0) SiQ(1), SiQ(2) units, and S1 contained also SiQ(3) and SiQ(4) units. The mechanical testing, environmental scanning electron microscopy, mercury intrusion porosimetry, X-ray diffractometry, infrared spectroscopy, amount of binders and thermogravimetric analysis are investigated to study the properties of the geopolymer binders. The results show that the compressive strength values of geopolymer G2 (22.9, 27.6, 32.6, 36 and 39.7 MPa) are higher than that of G1 (17.7, 19.1, 21.2, 29.9 and 32.8 MPa) at 7, 14, 21, 28 and 56 days respectively. The microstructure of G2 is more compact with fewer unreacted metakaolin particles. It can be concluded that sodium waterglass from waste glass and rice husk ash are suitable alternative activators for the production of metakaolin-based geopolymers. In addition, they constitute a better ecological choice when compared to commercial sodium silicate from melting process. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available