Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Minimum flexural reinforcement of fly ash and GGBS based geopolymer

concrete members
Andal Mudimby ⇑, D. Bhanuprakash
Civil Engineering Department, Kakatiya Institute of Technology and Science, Yerragattugutta, Warangal 506012, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Geopolymer concrete is a relatively new binder material that can replace cement in concrete. Fly ash is
Available online xxxx activated in the presence of alkali activator (combination of alkali Silicate and alkali hydroxide) that binds
the fine aggregate and coarse aggregate in geopolymer concrete. These concretes need temperature cur-
Keywords: ing to the extent of 60 °C for about 24 h. The temperature curing to this extent is difficult in conventional
Geopolymer concrete construction practices. Many researchers have reported that fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace
Alkali activated concrete slag (GGBFS) based geopolymer concrete can be cured in the room temperature and can develop desired
Flexural reinforcement
strength. With this advent, research in the direction of geopolymer concrete in respect of mechanical
Fly ash
Ground granulated blast furnace slag
strength characteristics like tensile strength, compressive strength and modulus of elasticity, mix design
Outdoor curing and confinement aspects of geopolymer concrete, is increasing. This paper presents the behavioural
aspects of reinforced geopolymer concrete members subjected to flexural loading. Three different propor-
tions of geopolymer concrete with target 28-day compressive strength of 30 MPa, 45 MPa and 60 MPa
were developed. The test results indicated that minimum flexural reinforcement is needed in geopolymer
concrete beams to avoid brittle failure and controls the cracking. Minimum flexural reinforcement is
needed to maintain the integrity of the reinforced concrete members even after the tensile resistance
of concrete is exhausted. Thus, an expression for the minimum flexural reinforcement needed in beams
is proposed.
Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Advances in Construc-
tion Materials and Management.

1. Introduction This research presented a mix design procedure for the proportion-
ing of geopolymer concrete. It is concluded that geopolymer con-
Infrastructure facilities needed for smart cities are increasing crete with an acceptable compressive strength can be produced
the demand of concrete production by several folds. Use of cement with outdoor curing (without heat curing) with the combination
in concrete making is indispensable as on today as no substitute to of GGBS and fly ash as source materials. Kumaravel et. al. [2]
cement is economically available. The cement production is caus- worked on the flexural behaviour of the nominal mix of an M20
ing lot of environmental pollution by releasing nearly one tonne grade used in geopolymer concrete under the steam curing cham-
of carbon dioxide for every ton production of cement. Geopolymer ber at 60 °C for 24 h. Load-displacement response of the geopoly-
concrete proposed by Davidovits (1988) attracted several research- mer concrete beams were compared with control beams and
ers all over the world to replace cement in concrete making and theoretical results. S. Kumaravel et. al. [3] research paper described
encourage the use of class F fly ash which is a waste product from the flexural behaviour of M50 grade of geopolymer concrete and
thermal power plants. Class F fly ash along with GGBFS has been compared the same response with control beams prepared with
used to produce geopolymer concrete, which can be cured at room conventional reinforced cement concrete. Paras S. Pithadiya et. al.
temperature around 30 °C. G. Mallikarjuna et. al. [1] proposed the [4] stated that curing time causes the variation in strength of
mix proportioning of geopolymer concrete with fly ash and GGBFS. geopolymer concrete. Replacement of fly ash with GGBFS increases
the strength gradually without oven curing. Oven cured cubes
show higher compressive and tensile strength than that of outdoor
⇑ Corresponding author.
temperature cured cubes. Thus, by using GGBFS content, the prob-
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Mudimby), bhanuprakashdusa@gmail.
com (D. Bhanuprakash).
lem of oven curing can be removed. M. Venu et. al. [5] reported that

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.05.031
2214-7853/Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Advances in Construction Materials and Management.

Please cite this article as: A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash, Minimum flexural reinforcement of fly ash and GGBS based geopolymer concrete members,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.05.031
A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

the confinement to geopolymer concrete (GPC) significantly are planned to varying different percentages of longitudinal rein-
increased the post-peak response, which converted the brittle fail- forcement and grade of concrete. To achieve the condition of min-
ure mode to ductile mode. In the case of tie confined GPC speci- imum reinforcement, three different percentage reinforcements
mens, increase in peak stress, energy absorption capacity, that are less than minimum reinforcement is taken and other three
ductility ratio and modulus of toughness were found to be higher percentage reinforcement variations are taken as more than the
than unconfined GPC specimens. G. Mallikarjuna Rao et. al. [6] assumed minimum flexural reinforcement. As per ACI 318 M
11,
based on the experimental results concluded that molarity of the minimum percentage of flexural reinforcement is taken as
pffiffiffi0ffi
sodium hydroxide in the alkaline activator of geopolymer does Ast ¼ 0:25 f bd=fy, where fy is the yield stress of the longitudinal
not affect normal consistency significantly and final setting time reinforcement, b and d are the breadth and effective depth of the
increases with increase in molarity of sodium hydroxide in the beam respectively. f’ is the cylinder compressive strength of
alkaline activator. G. Mallikarjuna Rao et. al. [7] reported that concrete.
XRD analysis helps to identify the amorphous phases in GPC and
these phases are responsible for the contribution of strength. The
3. Materials used
minerals (Albite and Microcline) identified using XRD analysis
are responsible for an increase in strength in GPC. T. D. Gunnes-
Coarse aggregate of maximum size, 20 mm, is used in present
wara Rao et.al [8] reported that geopolymer oven cured concrete
experimental work. The specific gravity of coarse aggregate is
shows better structural performance in terms of fracture parame-
2.68 and fineness modulus is 7.12. River sand of specific gravity
ters like fracture toughness, characteristic length and critical stress
2.4, bulk density of 1520 kg/m3 and fineness modulus of 2.72 is
intensity factor compared to geopolymer concrete cured at ambi-
used.
ent conditions.
Locally available fly-ash collected from Kothagudem Thermal
As there is no stipulation for minimum flexural reinforcement
Power Station (KTPS) was used and chemical composition was con-
necessarily to be maintained in geopolymer concrete members,
firmed to IS 3812–1981. Low calcium fly ash categorised as class F
this study is devoted to obtaining a condition for minimum flexural
according to ASTM C618 (a by-product from the thermal power
reinforcement using the expressions presented in ACI 318 M for
station whose source material is coal) is used in the present study.
conventional reinforced concrete members.
Specific gravity of the fly ash is found to be 2.08 and 85% of mate-
rial pass through 90-lm sieve. GGBFS from the JSW steel ltd of Bel-
2. Research statement and methodology lary, Karnataka state was used and chemical composition is
conformed to IS: 12089–1987. GGBFS is a waste product from
With an increase in the percentage of longitudinal reinforce- the iron manufacturing industry. The chemical composition and
ment, four failure states can be observed. Different states of failure physical properties of fly ash and GGBFS are given in Table 1.
are presented in Fig. 1. When the percentage flexural reinforce- Alkaline activator: Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) flakes and
ment is low, the failure pattern is brittle and the flexural strength sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) solution were used in this experimental
of the member is the cracking strength, represented by the line AB work. The chemical composition given by supplier is shown in
in the Fig. 1. Further increase in the percentage flexural reinforce- Table 2. Conplast SP430 sulfonated naphthalene formaldehyde is
ment from B to C in Fig. 1, increases the ultimate bearing capacity used to improve the flow properties of concrete it is in conformity
beyond the cracking strength. At the point C, balance state of fail- with ASTM C494.
ure envisages. Beyond the point C, the failure is over reinforced Reinforcement: In this experimental study, in the place of ten-
failure, without much increase in the ultimate bearing capacity, sion steel galvanised iron wires 3 mm and 4 mm diameter, Mild
envisage by the crushing of the concrete in the compression region. steel (Fe250) 6 mm diameter round bars and TMT (Fe500) 8 mm,
A designer is expected to adopt the flexural reinforcement in the 12 mm diameter ribbed bars were used with specifications con-
region BC of the Fig. 1. The percentage flexural reinforcement at firming to IS 432 (part-1)-1982, IS 1786 – 2008 respectively. Prop-
B, in Fig. 1, is referred as the minimum reinforcement and the same erties of steel bars used are given in Table 3.
is well documented for conventional concrete. Geopolymer con-
crete, being a new construction material, no stipulation for mini-
mum flexural reinforcement is reported in the literature. Thus, 4. Experimental program
the present technical paper focus to arrive at minimum flexural
reinforcement for geopolymer concrete members. Flexural tests Experimental programme consists of casting and testing eigh-
teen geopolymer concrete beams varying percentage of reinforce-
ment and compressive strength of concrete. Three geopolymer
concrete grades are designed with a target compressive strength
of 30 MPa, 45 MPa and 60 MPa. Proportion of the materials used
for these grades of geopolymer concrete is presented in Table 4.
To achieve the desired strength fly ash and GGBFS proportions
are changed. The details of the mix design and the reinforcement
details are presented in Table 5. Beam cross section is maintained
constant as breadth 100 mm and overall depth 150 mm. The effec-
tive depth of the beam is 135 mm. Span of the beam is taken as
1800 mm, with constant bending moment region of 300 mm. Shear
span is 750 mm, with shear span to effective depth ratio of 5.56.
This shear span to depth ratio ensures the flexure mode of failure.
The test set up is shown in Fig. 2. Fly-ash, GGBFS and aggregates
were mixed for about four minutes together with quantities spec-
ified in the mix proportion. Super plasticizer was added to the
alkali activated solution and then this solution was mixed with
Fig. 1. Typical variation of ultimate moment capacity with the percentage flexural the binder-aggregate mixture for 3–4 min. Before placing this
reinforcement. mix into the mould, workability was checked using slump cone
2
A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1
Chemical composition of Fly-ash and GGBFS.

Parameter (% by mass) LOI Al2O3 SiO2 Fe2O3 CaO MgO MnO Other ingredients
Fly ash 3.72 19.24 63.41 4.46 2.28 1.18 0.04 5.67
GGFS 1.41 14.42 37.73 1.11 36.34 8.71 0.02 0.26

Note: LOI = loss on ignition.

Table 2 can be obtained by equating the linear fit shown in Fig. 3 to

Chemical composition of Sodium Hydroxide and Sodium Silicate. (y ¼ 2:485x þ 0:139) to 1. From this equation, the minimum per-
Chemical composition of Sodium Chemical composition of Sodium centage of flexural reinforcement of geopolymer concrete mem-
Hydroxide Silicate bers can be taken as 0.3465%. The minimum flexural
Parameter % by weight Parameter % by weight reinforcement obtained from the experimental data is approxi-
Purity 96% Alkalinity 14.3%
mately nearer to the beam reinforced with high strength deformed
Na2CO3 2% SiO2 39.7% bars. Further study in this direction is needed as the minimum per-
Others 2% Water 54% centage flexural reinforcement expression depends on the grade of
concrete and yield strength of the rebars.
Behaviour of reinforced Geopolymer concrete elements under
apparatus. The cast specimens are left for air drying at the room flexural loading is similar to that of conventional reinforced con-
temperature. Specimens were de-moulded after 24 h of concreting crete members subjected to bending. Three distinct regions in
and kept for outdoor curing (temperature 33 ± 3 °C). the load deflection response of reinforced geopolymer concrete
A: Beam; B: Cylinder compressive strength of concrete (MPa); members under flexural loading is observed viz., pre-cracking, post
C: Modulus of Rupture (MPa); D: Area of tension reinforcement cracking and post ultimate. The pre-cracking stiffness is governed
(mm2); E: Percentage of reinforcement; F: Yield stress of the rein- by the cross-sectional dimensions and grade of concrete. The sim-
forcement (MPa); G: Cracking load(kN); H: Ultimate load(kN); I: ilar trend is observed in geopolymer concrete members also. The
Minimum flexural reinforcement as per ACI318M-11. post cracking behaviour is depended on the percentage reinforce-
ment as the post cracking load bearing resistance depends mainly
on the reinforcement. The post ultimate behaviour depends on the
5. Discussion on test results percentage of reinforcement (under reinforced state or over rein-
forced state) and ductility of the reinforcing bars. These three
Eighteen simply supported beams are tested under two-point states are commonly observed in any reinforced conventional con-
bending, with shear span to depth ratio of 5.56. Cracking load is crete members. These three aspects were noticed in the reinforced
taken as the load where the load deflection response deviates from geopolymer concrete members also. A typical load and mid span
linearity. Cracking load and ultimate load of the tested beams are deflection response of two members GPC45-3 and GPC45-6 is
presented in Table 5. Fig. 2 shows the variation of ratio of ultimate shown in Fig. 4. GPC45-3 refers the reinforced geopolymer con-
moment to cracking moment of the beams tested with the percent- crete members with percentage reinforcement less than as speci-
age flexural reinforcement. From this variation it is clear that fied in ACI code. GPC45-6 refers the reinforced geopolymer
increase in the area of reinforcement up to certain percentage concrete members with percentage reinforcement more than as
would not improve the ultimate moment capacity of the beam. specified in ACI code. The load deflection variation of the two
Cracking moment and ultimate moment are nearly same. This indi- beams clearly indicates that the beam with percentage reinforce-
cates that the reinforcement provided in the beam with percentage ment less than ACI specified percentage reinforcement failed with-
steel less than the minimum specified in the ACI code, do not con- out any post cracking resistance. The resistance of the beam is
tribute to the ultimate load bearing capacity. A linear fit consider- limited to the cracking strength of the member. The percentage
ing the cases where the percentage reinforcement is more than of reinforcement in this case is 0.629% and yield stress of reinforce-
minimum flexural reinforcement as specified in ACI code is shown ment as 252 MPa. Load deflection variation of GPC45-6 with per-
in Fig. 3. For the case of beams having percentage flexural rein- centage reinforcement more than ACI specified percentage
forcement less than minimum flexural reinforcement as specified reinforcement failed in a ductile manner showed the post cracking
in ACI code, the ultimate moment to cracking moment is taken resistance as well as post ultimate response. The percentage of
as unity. Thus, the idealised variation of ratio of ultimate moment reinforcement in GPC45-6 is 1.746% with yield stress of reinforce-
to cracking moment with percentage tension reinforcement can be ment as 523 MPa. This clearly indicates that yield stress of rein-
taken as constant 1.0 up to certain percentage reinforcement (can forcing bars plays an important role in the load bearing capacity
referred as minimum flexural reinforcement), there after a linear beyond first crack load. Up to initiation of cracking both the beams
variation. Taking these variations, the minimum percentage rein- showed similar response and same stiffness. The cracking load is
forcement can be taken as the percentage reinforcement beyond for both the beams is same. The beam with reinforcement more
which the ultimate moment capacity of the member is more than than specified in ACI showed improved ultimate load beyond
the cracking moment. Thus, the minimum flexural reinforcement

Table 3
Details of Reinforcing bars.

Steel specification Diameter (mm) Yield stress (N/mm2) Ultimate stress (N/mm2) Elongation
Fe250 4 257 425 23.05%
Fe 250 6 252 411 23.24%
Fe 500 8 514 586 14.20%
Fe 500 10 523 619 12.12%
Fe 500 12 546 650 12.33%

3
A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 4
Details of Mix proportions adopted.

Mix Binder (kg/m3) Aggregates Solution to binder Na2SiO3 to NaOH NaOH Superplasticizer as percentage Slump Wet Density
(kg/m3) ratio ratio Molarity of binder (mm) (kg/m3)
Fly GGBFS Fine Coarse
Ash
GPC30 280 120 755 1000 0.5 2.5 8M 5 75 2355
GPC45 282 188 657 1018 0.5 2.5 8M 5.5 78 2380
GPC60 150 350 627 1018 0.5 2.5 8M 7.5 92 2395

Table 5
Reinforcement details and test results.

A B C D E F G H I
GPC30-1 30.65 3.11 25.14 0.186 257 3.22 3.25 0.533%
GPC30-2 30.65 3.11 37.71 0.279 257 3.43 3.48 0.533%
GPC30-3 30.65 3.11 56.57 0.419 252 3.51 3.82 0.543%
GPC30-4 30.65 3.11 84.86 0.629 514 3.74 6.45 0.326%
GPC30-5 30.65 3.11 100.57 0.745 523 3.75 7.66 0.321%
GPC30-6 30.65 3.11 150.85 1.117 523 3.78 11.45 0.321%
GPC45-1 46.89 4.48 37.71 0.279 257 4.36 4.52 0.653%
GPC45-2 46.89 4.48 56.57 0.419 252 4.42 4.56 0.665%
GPC45-3 46.89 4.48 84.86 0.629 252 4.65 4.69 0.665%
GPC45-4 46.89 4.48 100.57 0.745 514 4.87 8.14 0.326%
GPC45-5 46.89 4.48 150.85 1.117 523 4.95 17.15 0.321%
GPC45-6 46.89 4.48 235.72 1.746 523 5.10 27.21 0.321%
GPC60-1 62.33 7.81 37.71 0.279 257 8.05 8.14 0.753%
GPC60-2 62.33 7.81 56.57 0.419 252 8.25 8.27 0.768%
GPC60-3 62.33 7.81 84.86 0.745 252 8.82 8.88 0.768%
GPC60-4 62.33 7.81 150.85 1.117 523 8.61 22.05 0.370%
GPC60-5 62.33 7.81 235.72 1.746 523 8.89 35.63 0.370%
GPC60-6 62.33 7.81 339.43 2.514 546 9.21 58.26 0.355%

Fig. 2. Test setup of beam.

cracking. The percentage increase in ultimate load bearing capacity concrete specimen show less modulus of elasticity compared to
is about 5.33 times. conventional concrete. This observation is in line with the conclu-
The pre-cracking stiffness of the GPC45-3 and GPC45-6 is found sions of Venu el.al. [5]. This indicates that the geopolymer concrete
to be same and is 1.88kN/mm and span to maximum deflection members show higher deformations compared to conventional
ratio is 674. In case of GPC45-3, no post cracking stiffness is reinforced concrete members. Thus, geopolymer concrete elements
noticed, while in the case of GPC45-6, post-cracking stiffness is show higher deformations even at service loads. This aspect needs
found to be 1.18kN/mm and span to maximum deflection ratio at further detailed study.
ultimate load is observed to be 32. This indicates that the beha-
viour of reinforced geopolymer concrete members is similar to that
of conventional reinforced concrete members and can be treated as
conventional reinforced concrete. Based on the pre-cracking stiff-
6. Conclusions
ness (taking the gross cross section into calculations) the modulus
of elasticity of GPC is determined and is found to be 7802 MPa. This
Based on the experimental results of eighteen reinforced
value is very small compared conventional concrete of cylinder
geopolymer concrete members subjected to flexural loading the
compressive strength of 40 MPa equal to 30,000 MPa. Geopolymer
following conclusions are made.
4
A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. Variation of ratio of ultimate moment to cracking moment with the percentage reinforcement.

Fig. 4. Load – mid span deflection variation of GPC45-3 and GPC45-6 reinforced geopolymer concrete members.

 The behaviour of reinforced geopolymer concrete members CRediT authorship contribution statement
under flexural loading is similar to that of conventional
concrete. Andal Mudimby: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision,
 An expression for minimum reinforcement of geopolymer con- Writing – review & editing. D. Bhanuprakash: Software, Valida-
crete members like convention reinforced concrete, under flex- tion, Writing – original draft.
ural loading is required considering the yield stress of
reinforcement and cylinder compressive strength of geopoly- Data availability
mer concrete. In the present investigation the minimum rein-
forcement is found to be 0.3465%. Data will be made available on request.
 The load deflection response of reinforced geopolymer concrete
members under flexural loading comprises of three distinct
Declaration of Competing Interest
regions viz., pre-cracking stage (with high stiffness), post crack-
ing stage, where in the reinforcement plays an important role
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
(with reduced stiffness) and post ultimate stage.
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
 The modulus of elasticity of geopolymer concrete is found to be
to influence the work reported in this paper.
less than conventional concrete.

Acknowledgements

Authors thank the principal and the administration of Kakatiya

Institute of Technology and Science, Yerragattugutta, Warangal for
5
A. Mudimby and D. Bhanuprakash Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

providing the necessary infrastructure for conducting the [8] T.D. Gunneswararao, P. Alfrite, G.M. Rao, M. Andal, F. Ash, Fracture parameters
of fly ash and GGBS based geopolymer concrete, Appl. Mech. Mater. 765 (2015)
experiments.
1090–1094.

Further reading
References
[9] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 383–1970: Specification for Coarse and Fine
Aggregates from Natural Sources for Concrete, New Delhi.
[1] G. Mallikarjuna Rao, T. D. Gunneswara Rao, A quantitative method of approach in
[10] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 2386(part3): Methods of test for
designing the mix proportions of fly ash and GGBS-based geopolymer concrete,
aggregates for concrete, New Delhi.
Australian Journal of Civil Engineering 16 (1), 53-63.
[11] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 3812(Part-1):2003: Specification for
[2] Kumaravel S, Thirugnanasambandam S, Flexural Behaviour of Reinforced Low
Pulverized Fuel Ash, New Delhi.
Calcium Fly Ash-based Geopolymer Concrete Beam, the global journal of
[12] ASTM C 618-2012: Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined
researchers in engineering Civil and structural engineering, 2013;13(8):8–14
natural pozzolan for use in concrete.
[3] S. Kumaravel, S. Thirugnanasambandam, Flexural behaviour of geopolymer
[13] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 12089-1987: specification for granulated
concrete beams, Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Stud. 3 (1) (2013) 4–7.
slag for the manufacture of Portland slag cement, New Delhi.
[4] P.S. Pithadiya, A.V. Nakum, Experimental study on geopolymer concrete by
[14] ASTM C494 -2017: Standard specification for chemical admixtures for
using GGBS, Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 3 (2) (2015) 2319–2321.
concrete.
[5] M. Venu, T.D.G. Rao, Tie-confinement aspects of fly ash-GGBS based geopolymer
[15] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 432 (part 1) – 1982: Specification for mild
concrete short columns, Constr. Build. Mater. 151 (2017) 28–35.
steel and medium tensile steel bars and hard-drawn steel wire for concrete
[6] G. Mallikarjuna Rao, T. D. Gunneswara Rao, Final Setting Time and Compressive
reinforcement, New Delhi.
Strength of Fly Ash and GGBS-Based Geopolymer Paste and Mortar, civil
[16] BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) IS 1786 – 2008: High strength deformed steel
engineering research article, 2015.
bars and wires for concrete reinforcement specification.
[7] G. Mallikarjuna Rao, T.D. Gunneswara Rao, Effect of fly ash and GGBS
[17] ACI 318M-11 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318M-
combination on mechanical and durability properties of GPC, Adv. Concr.
08) and Commentary.
Constr. 5 (4) (2017).