Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Science and Technology,

an International Journal
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jestch

Full Length Article

Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption

characteristics of geopolymer mortar
Kasım Mermerdasß a,⇑, Soran Manguri b, Dia Eddin Nassani b, Safie Mahdi Oleiwi b,c
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Harran University, Sßanlıurfa, Turkey
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Hasan Kalyoncu University, Gaziantep, Turkey
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Diyala University, Diyala, Iraq

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

Article history: Even though aggregate constitutes major volume in geopolymer concrete, only limited study related to
Received 8 May 2017 this parameter has been reported. This paper presents the summary of study carried out to understand
Revised 8 November 2017 the influence of aggregate content and grading on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of
Accepted 23 November 2017
geopolymer mortar. Three types of aggregates, namely, natural river sand, crushed limestone, and com-
Available online xxxx
bined sand-limestone were used in geopolymer mortar. Fly ash was used as source material.
Effectiveness of aggregates was evaluated in terms of the workability, fresh unit weight, absorption
Keywords:
and strength of geopolymer mortar. The alkaline activator is a mix of 12 molarity of NaOH solution with
Geopolymer
Fly ash
Na2SiO3 in ratio of 1:2.5. The experiments were performed on geopolymer mortar cubes under curing
Compressive strength temperatures of 90 °C with curing period of 24 h. Test results indicate that geopolymer mortar including
Absorption natural sand shows better flowability compared to other aggregates, moreover, coarse grading of sand
Flowability caused higher flow. The highest compressive and splitting tensile strength was obtained in crushed lime-
stone. The combined sand-limestone shows the lowest water absorption and sorptivity compared with
other types of aggregates.
Ó 2017 Karabuk University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction minimize the carbon footprint of concrete productions. Granulated

Portland cement-based concrete is the most used material in
the construction industry. Harmful gasses like CO2, NO2, SO2 and
specks of dust are discharged into the atmosphere during the pro-
duction of Portland cement because of the calcination of limestone
and combustion of fossil fuel. Along with environmental issues,
Portland cement production also requires a considerable amount
of energy, following steel and aluminum [1].
Geopolymer is a developed alternative binder for concrete that
utilizes industrial by-products. The geopolymer binder is manufac-
tured by the reaction of an alkaline liquid, normally a mixture of
sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide solution, with industrial
waste materials that are rich in silica and alumina like fly ash
[2–4], granulated slag [5,6] and metakaolin [7]. Fly ash mixed with
metakaolin can also be used as source material for geopolymer
[8,9]. A huge amount of FA, produced by coal-fired power stations,
could be used efficiently in manufacturing geopolymer to
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kasim.mermerdas@harran.edu.tr (K. Mermerdasß).
Peer review under responsibility of Karabuk University.
slag is another waste material that is abundant worldwide and it is
a by-product of the metallurgical industry and consists chiefly of
lime and calcium–magnesium aluminosilicates. The use of granu-
lated slag as cement replacement material in geopolymer concrete
reduces the CO2 emission [10].
In recent years, geopolymer technology has been developed to
decrease the use of Portland cement in concrete [11]. As part of
the sustainability movement in the concrete industry, the technol-
ogy has led researchers to the discovery of a green concrete as a
substitute for traditional concrete. In geopolymers production half
amount energy required to produce the activator compared to
Portland cement production [12]. In addition, by product materials
such as fly ash are cheaper than Portland cement about 10–30 per-
cent according to [13]. However, the information compiled from
the literature still need further investigation to be proven.
Generally, concrete volume contains around 80% of aggregate,
which could greatly influence the characteristic of concrete, fresh-
ness as well as its hardness [14]. Aggregates grading, shape, and
texture greatly affect workability, finishability, bleeding, pumpa-
bility, and segregation of fresh concrete. Moreover, when hardened
characteristics are taken into account; strength, stiffness, shrink-
age, creep, density, permeability, and durability are also highly

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
2215-0986/Ó 2017 Karabuk University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
2 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

affected by aggregate features. It was also mentioned that the poor
mixture proportioning and grading variation will cause construc-
tion and durability problems [15]. If the voids between aggregates
are decreased, the amount of paste need to fill these voids will be
decreased, keeping desired workability and target strength. There-
fore, best mixture proportion will create good concrete-quality
with a lowest amount of cement. The lesser cement paste at a con-
stant water to cement ratio provide the concrete more durable
[16].
Sreenivasulu et al. [17] studied the mechanical properties of
geopolymer concrete with different fine aggregate content and
grading. Sand and granite slurry were blended in different propor-
tions (100:0, 80:20, 60:40 and 40:60). Fly ash and granulated slag
were used at 50:50 ratios as geopolymer binders. Compressive
strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength were studied
after 7, 28 and 90 days of curing at ambient room temperature. It
was revealed that the mechanical properties increased till fine
aggregate proportion of 60:40 and decreasing trend has been
observed at proportion of 40:60.
Mane and Jadhav [18] studied the effect of elevated tempera-
tures on fly ash geopolymer with different types of fine and coarse
aggregates. Granite and basalt aggregates were used as coarse
aggregates, whereas crushed sand and river sand were used as fine
aggregates. Using coarse granite aggregate for producing geopoly-
mer shows better strength than using basalt aggregates. Whereas
crushed sand gives high strength compare to river sand.
Wang et al. [19] studied the bonding strength and microstruc-
ture of the interface between granite and marble aggregates on
granulated slag geopolymer. The result shows that the bonding
strength of GM-granite interfacial transitional zone was less than
that of GM0-marble. With the hydration development, the com-
pact block structures were formed and connected to aggregates
on the surface of GM-granite/GM-marble interfacial transitional
zone.
Nuaklong et al. [20] studied the effect of crushed limestone
aggregate and concrete’s recycled aggregate on strength and dura-
bility of geopolymer concrete. It has been reported that concrete’s
recycled aggregate can be utilized for producing geopolymer con-
cretes. Geopolymer concrete containing concrete’s recycled aggre-
gate possessed sufficiently high compressive strength of 76–93% of
the same geopolymer concretes containing crushed limestone. It
was also concluded that using recycled concrete aggregate lead
to decrease density of geopolymer concrete by 6%–10% ranged
between (2160–2210 kg/m3). Eventually, it was claimed that using
recycle concrete aggregate caused high sorptivity and water
absorption.
Tenn et al. [21] studied the effect of aggregate mass percentages
in the geopolymer binder mixtures to determine the impact of the
aggregate content on the synthesized material properties. They
concluded that the incorporation of aggregates in the reaction mix-
tures change the aspect of the materials due to the presence of
interactions between binders and aggregates. Several parameters
that influence the adhesion between the aggregates and the binder
such as the porosity and the roughness of the aggregates [22]; the
chemical composition at the interface [23].
Joseph and Mathew [24] studied the behavior of fly ash
geopolymer concrete by the effect of aggregate content. It was con-
cluded that increasing aggregate content lead to increase the split
tensile strength of the geopolymer. Using aggregate content in the
range of 60%–75% (with constant fine aggregate to total aggregate
ratio of 0.35), the flexural and split tensile strength increased by
30.6% and 45.5%, respectively.
In this study, an experimental program was conducted to study
the influence of aggregate content and grading on the mechanical
and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mortar (GM). Three
types of aggregates, namely, natural river sand, crushed limestone,
and combined sand-limestone (50% natural river sand and 50%
crushed limestone) were used. Four grades (0–4, 2–4, 1–2, and
0–1) mm for each type of aggregate were also used. Effectiveness
of aggregates was tested in terms of the workability, fresh unit
weight, absorption and strength of GM. FA was selected as the base
material for alkali activation.
2. Experimental study
Experimental investigation primarily focused on workability,
fresh unit weight, strength, water absorption and sorptivity of
FA-based GM for different types and grading of aggregates.
2.1. Materials
2.1.1. Aggregate
The primary focus of this workth is to evaluate the strength and
absorption of fly ash based GM experimentally utilizing three types
of aggregates, namely, natural river sand, crushed limestone, and
combined sand-limestone (50% natural river sand and 50% crushed
limestone). Four grades (0–4, 2–4, 1–2, and 0–1) mm for each type
of aggregate were also used. Fig. 1 indicates the grading of aggre-
gates. The figure indicates that the crushed limestone aggregate
is the finest while the particles of natural sand are the coarsest.
The combination of these two types of aggregates was designated
as combined sand. By using the percent passing values given in
Fig. 1, the fineness moduli of the aggregates are found as, 2.70
and 3.38 for crushed limestone and natural sand, respectively.
2.1.2. Geopolymer binder
FA was utilized as binding materials to develop geopolymer
mortar in an alkaline environment. FA of class F according to ASTM
C618 [25] was supplied from Ceyhan Sugozu thermal power plant.
The physical and chemical properties of FA are given in Table 1 as
obtained by X-ray fluorescence (XRF). Rangan [13], proposes that
the chemical composition and the particle size distribution of the
fly ash must be established prior to use. He also proposes to use
XRF for determination of chemical compositions. Observing the
values presented in Table 1, it was found out that chemical compo-
sition of the FA is compatible with the class F fly ashes used in
Geopolymer studies presented in the literature [13,24,25]
The alkaline activator is a mix of 12 M of NaOH solution with
sodium silicate in ratio of 1:2.5. The ratio of alkaline solution to
binder equal to 0.33. NaOH in the form of pellets were used to pro-
duce NaOH solution. The composition of Na2SiO3 solution is 29.4%
SiO2, 14.7% Na2O, and 55.99% water (by mass). The plasticizer is
Fig. 1. Grading of the aggregates.

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 3

Table 1 alkaline solution and FA are shown in Fig. 2. The binder content
Properties of FA. in the mixtures is total amount of alkaline solutions and the base
Physical and chemical analysis (%) FA material (FA). The selected binder content is 1200 kg/m3. The mix
CaO 2.2 proportions of GM are illustrated in Table 2. The alkaline solution
SiO2 57.2 was the only liquid component in all mixtures (without adding
Al2O3 24.4 water). Super-plasticizer with specific gravity of 1.07 was added
Fe2O3 7.1 to the mix to enhance the workability and to make GM mix homo-
MgO 2.4
SO3 0.3
geneous. The mass of NaOH solids in a solution with 12 M concen-
K2O 3.4 tration consisted of 12
40 = 360 grams (g) of sodium hydroxide
Na2O 0.4 solids per liter of the solution; 40 was molecular weight of sodium
Loss of ignition 1.5 hydroxide. The mass of sodium hydroxide solids was measured as
Specific gravity 2.25
260 g per kg of sodium hydroxide solution.
Specific surface area (m2/kg) 379

2.3. Mixing, Casting, and curing regime

utilized to enhance the workability of GM and it was taken as 6% of

binder.
2.2. Mix proportions
Twelve GM mixtures were designed with constant FA content to
study the fresh and hardened properties of GM with constant con-
centration of the solution of 12 M and Na2SiO3 to NaOH ratio of 2.5.
Three types of aggregates, namely, natural river sand, crushed lime-
stone, and combined sand-limestone were used in GM. Four grades
(0–4, 2–4, 1–2, and 0–1) mm for each type of aggregate were also
used. The photographic views of the aggregates together with the
Flakes of NaOH were dissolved in distilled water to obtain the
needed concentration of the solution for 24 h prior to use. FA
and aggregates were mixed in the mixer for about 3 min. The
sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide were mixed with super
plasticizer and next added to the dry materials and mixed for 5
min. The fresh GM was poured in two layers in the moulds (mold
size is 50
50
50 mm). After casting GM in the specimen moulds
and to remove the air voids, the moulds were vibrated using
vibrating table for 30 s. The specimens were wrapped with heat
resistant thin plastic film as shown in Fig. 3 to avoid evaporation
of water. The experiments were performed on GM cubes under
curing temperatures of 90 °C with curing period of 24 h. In a
preliminary study conducted by the authors 12 M was found to
be the best Molarity for the highest compressive strength for the
specified curing period.
Next, all the mixtures of FA geopolymer mortar were cured in
an oven under curing temperature of 90 °C for initial curing (IC)
of 24 h. Then specimens were demolded after the curing process
and the specimens were tested. Considering full factorial combina-
tion of 3 types of aggregates and 4 grading of each aggregate type;
a total of 218 samples were obtained.

2.4. Testing procedures

2.4.1. Flow table

In accordance to ASTM C1437, the workability of fresh geopoly-
mer mortar determined by using flow table test shown in the Fig. 4,
the cone dimensions are bottom diameter 100 mm, top diameter
70 mm and height diameter 60 mm. The cone is placed on a center
of flow table instrument, and then mold cone filled with fresh mor-
tar into two layers each layer tamped 20 times with a tamper,
tamping pressure should be sufficient to compact the mortar uni-
formly. After the top surface of mold wiped and leveled the mold
instantly lifted vertically, then the flow table is dropped 25 times
in 15 s. The percentage of flow table mortar can be measured by
computing four symmetrically measured diameters in two axes.
Workability of geopolymer mortar can be classified as high, mod-
erate, and stiff.

2.4.2. Unit weight

The unit weight of the concrete was measured following ASTM
Cl38. The cubic mold for the unit weight test was utilized to mea-
sure the unit weight of mortar. The volume of the cubic mold was
known. It was filled with freshly mixed mortar and leveled with
the plainer. The weight of the empty mold and the mold filled with
mortar was measured separately. The unit weight was calculated
using the following equation:
Mf  Me
Unit weight ¼ ð1Þ
V
Fig. 2. Geopolymer mortars constituent a) Crushed limestone mixture b) Natural
sand mixture. where

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
4 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Geopolymer mortar mix designs.

Designation Crushed limestone Natural sand FA Na2SiO3 solution Solution of NaOH S.P.
GM (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3)
CL1 796.61 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CL2 806.06 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CL3 790.31 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CL4 780.87 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
NS1 831.24 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
NS2 843.84 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
NS3 824.95 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
NS4 812.35 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CS1 406.96 406.96 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CS2 412.47 412.47 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CS3 403.81 403.81 799.92 285.6 114.24 47.99
CS4 398.3 398.3 799.92 285.6 114.24 47,99

CL: Crushed limestone, NS: Natural sand, CS: Combined sand

Fig. 3. Casting geopolymer mortar (mixtures prepared by 0–1 crushed limestone).

M f is weight of the mold filled with mortar 2.4.3. Compressive strength

M e is weight of the empty mold In the study of strength of materials, the compressive strength
V is volume of the mold is the capacity of a material or structure to withstand loads tending

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Fig. 4. Flow table test of geopolymer mortar.
to reduce. According to ASTM C109 for cement mortar cubes were
followed. Each mix was cast into several cube moulds, by filling the
mold halfway and vibrating for 30 s, filling the mold the rest of the
way and vibrating again for 30 s, then leveling off the top. The
moulds were then covered in plastic and covered again in vacuum
wrapping to keep a humid environment during curing. Molds were
placed in the oven at 90 °C for 24 h after mixing. A load 3000 kN
capacity digital compressive testing machine was used. Three iden-
tical specimens were tested, then, the results of compressive
strength were reported in a table and graphs after 24 h of curing
at 90 °C, and the compressive strength at 7, 28, and 56 days age
of room temperature (ambient curing) at 25 °C were also pre-
sented. For each parameter investigation, three identical samples
were tested in accordance with ASTM C-109 and the mean values
of compressive strength are reported in relevant tables and graphs.
2.4.4. Splitting tensile strength
Hardening fly ash geopolymer mortar specimens after 24 h cur-
ing at 90 °C, splitting tensile strength was performed on 3000 kN
capacity digital machine in accordance to ASTM C37 with a loading
rate 0.1 kN/s. For every mixture three identical specimen cubic 50

50
50 mm were tested. Splitting tensile strength of the speci-
men was calculated using the expression below
2P
fs ¼
pa2
where f s is splitting tensile strength (MPa), P is splitting load (New-
tons), a is dimension of cubic specimen (mm)
2.4.5. Water absorption
The main factor for evaluating the durability of concrete and
mortar is permeability. The durability in mortar largely depends
on ease entering and moving the liquid components through the
specimen matrix. Water absorption can be described by it’s the
amount of water can be absorbed by materials under a specific
condition. Also, it is the volume of pore space in specimen matrix
that liquid components can penetrate in. Generally, water absorp-
tion test is carry out by drying a specimen to a constant mass,
immersing the specimen into the water up to fully saturation,
Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
5
and computing the specimen mass increases as the dry mass
percentage.
In the present research, at 7 day’s age water absorption of spec-
imens have been determined. For each mix three identical speci-
mens were dried for 24 h at 100 °C until constant mass, and then
the mortar specimens were immersed in water for 24 h to become
a fully saturate, after that, the specimens wiped cleanly, and imme-
diately, the increase in mass evaluated in a saturated-surface-dry
(SSD) condition.
W2  W1
WA% ¼
100 ð3Þ
W1
where W1 is weight of specimen in dry condition, W2 is weight of
specimen in saturated surface dry condition.
2.4.6. Water sorptivity
Sorptivity can be considered as one of the easier test for evalu-
ating permeability of mortar/concrete. Water can penetrate into
the concrete or mortar specimens by capillary suction. In addition,
it can measure the rate of absorption fluid that was entering the
mortar/concrete by capillary suction. Sorptivity will be determined
by measuring the capillary water sorption by sorption depends on
both the capillary pressure and effective porosity. Capillary pres-
sure connected to the size of pores according to Young-Laplace
equation, as well as effective porosity relate to the pore space in
ð2Þ
the gel and capillary pores. The sorptivity test evaluates the
amount of capillary rise absorbed by mortar or concrete speci-
mens. At 7 days age, for each mix, three identical specimens were
dried in an oven at 100 °C for 24 h, then the specimens were taken
out from the oven and their side coated with silicone sealing in
order to ensure that water can ingress only in bottom of specimen,
then the mortar specimens were immersed in water as shown in
Fig. 5. It should be observed that water level not more than 3–5
mm above the base of specimen. The increase in the mass gain
weighted at different time intervals. The absorbed water volume
was determined by dividing the mass gained by the nominal sur-
face area of the sample and by the density of water. Then, the
square root of time versus these values was plotted and the sorp-
tivity index of mortar was calculated by the slope of the line of the
best fit.
6 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Fig. 5. Sorptivity test for geopolymer mortar.

3. Test results and discussions
3.1. Fresh properties tests
3.1.1. Flow table test
The workability of GM was evaluated using flow table test
according to ASTM C-124. The flow diameter of mini slump can
be defined as the diameter of GM that measured after spreading.
The flow diameter was measured immediately after completing
mixing of GM in the mixer. This test was designed to study the
effect of the aggregate properties on workability of geopolymer
mix. The workability of a mix could be classified based on the flow
diameter as shown in the Table 3 [26]. The minimum flow diame-
ter of 150 ± 10 mm could be considered as required flow for GM for
easily placing in the moulds.
Flow is a combination of several proportion including plasticity,
consistency and cohesion. Plasticity and cohesions are difficult to
measure in site. However, consistency is frequently used as the
measure of the workability. Aggregate grading and material prop-
erty largely affect the workability of GM. Fig. 6 shows that the type
of aggregate has great effect on workability of geopolymer mortar,
it was found that GM with natural sand has higher workability in
comparison to other types of aggregate due to natural sand’s
rounded particle shape and consequently lower specific surface
area. Nonetheless, grading of aggregate affected the flow of fly
ash-based GM as well. Higher flow of geopolymer mortar was
obtained when larger particle size distribution (24) mm without
depending on type of aggregate was used. Also, it was found that
geopolymer mortar with finer sand (01) mm has a low mortar
flow, it needs more alkaline activator to achieve a good flow com-
pared to other grades because of finer sand has high surface area
compared to coarse sand.
3.1.2. Fresh density test
Fresh density of FA based Geopolymer mortar was conducted
directly after mixing. The measured density was for the all
mixtures. Fig.7 presents the density of the fresh unit weight of
Table 3
Workability criteria of Geopolymer mortar.
FA-based GM. As shown in Fig. 7, there was insignificant increase
in mortar unit weight with the use of natural river sand. On the
other hand, fly-based geopolymer mortar exhibits a reduction in
fresh unit weight density by using crushed limestone because
crushed limestone has a less unit weight than natural river sand.
3.2. Hardened properties tests
3.2.1. Compressive strength
3.2.1.1. Effect of type and grading of aggregate on compressive
strength. The most important characteristic of FA-based GM is
compressive strength [27]. Fig. 8 shows the compressive strength
of GM with different aggregate types and grading at 1 day age,
the compressive strength was in the range of 28.25–47.83 MPa. It
was observed that using crushed limestone resulted in a higher
compressive strength compared with other aggregates. The reason
of higher compressive strength is because crushed limestone has
an angular shape which provides a higher surface-to-volume ratio
leading to better bond characteristics and strong interlock between
particles. However, it requires more binder to produce a workable
mixture. Furthermore, in the present study results indicated that
aggregate with a coarser grade (24) mm has a higher compressive
strength (47.83 MPa). Natural river sand shows lower compressive
strength due to its rounded and smooth surface. The rounded
shape of river sand causes less bonding strength with the matrix.
The correlation of hardened density and compressive strength
based on type and grading of aggregate is illustrated in Fig. 9,
which confirms that in all type of aggregate, denser material
caused high compressive strength of fly ash-basd GM [28]. But,
in case of changing the type of aggregate, the denser material does
not cause higher strength because of the compressive strength of
fly ash geopolymer mortar depending on the bond between binder
and aggregates, surface area, surface texture and angularity. Natu-
ral sand is a denser material but the bond between binder and
aggregate not strong, this cause low compressive strength, differ-
ently, the density of crushed limestone is low compare to natural
sand but because the bond between binder and aggregate are
strong as well as high surface area and angular particles resulted
in high compressive strength.

Sl. No. Flow Diameter
1 Above 250
2 180–250 mm
3 150–180 mm
4 120–150 mm
5 Below 120 mm
Workability 3.2.1.2. Effect of age on compressive strength. Age is considered to be
Very High
important to figure out the mechanical properties of fly ash
High geopolymer mortar over time. The chemical reaction of the high
Moderate temperature-cured geopolymer concrete is considerably fast poly-
Stiff merization process [29]. The compressive strength of geopolymer
Very Stiff
does not change significantly with age of concrete. This observa-

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 7

Fig. 6. Flow table of FA geopolymer mortar.

Fig. 7. Fresh unit weight of FA based geopolymer mortar.

Fig. 8. Compressive strength of GM with different aggregate grading.

tion is unlike to OPC concrete behavior, which the hydration pro-
cess continues to gain strength over time [28].
Figs. 10, 11 and 12 show the compressive strength of FA-based
GM utilizing crushed limestone, natural river sand, and combined
sand-limestone respectively. It can be drawn from figures that
compressive strength of all types of fine aggregates and all grades
slightly increase till 7 days [27]. then the gain of strength in 7–56
days is very little, therefore, the test results confirms a good agree-
ment of previous researches that compressive strength does not
vary with age [28].

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
8 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Fig. 9. Correlation of compressive strength and hardened density.

Fig. 10. Effect of age on compressive strength of GM with crushed limestone.

Fig. 11. Effect of age on compressive strength of GM with natural sand.

3.2.2. Splitting tensile strength test
Splitting tensile test was performed on GM specimens after 7
days as shown in Fig. 13. It can be noticed that splitting tensile
strength varies when type and grading of aggregate changes. The
results show that splitting tensile strength is higher in geopoly-
mer mortar with crushed limestone sand followed by combined
sand-limestone and natural river sand, better splitting tensile
strength in crushed limestone, since the particles of crushed
limestone are angular they formed a better bond. Also, Fig. 13
shows that coarse sand grade (24) mm gives higher splitting
tensile strength compared with other grading in all types of
aggregates.
There was a direct relationship between compressive strength
and splitting tensile strength. However, more investigation is
required to plot and introduce a correlation with high accuracy
which was not in the scope of this research. It can be concluded
that tensile strength of mortar raised with the increment of grade
of aggregate in the mixes of FA-based GM.

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 9

Fig. 12. Effect of age on compressive strength of GPM with combined sand-limestone.

Fig. 13. Splitting tensile strength of geopolymer mortar versus aggregate properties.

The correlation of splitting tensile strength and compressive
strength based on the type of aggregate illustrated in Fig. 14, with
the increase of compressive strength geopolymer mortar in all
types of aggregates and each grade of aggregate that were used,
the splitting tensile strength also increased proportionally.
3.3. Sorptivity
Sorptivity test is one of the most important tests that evaluate
the capillary structure of GM. Fig. 15 shows the experimental
results on water sorptivity at age of 7 day. It is noticed from the fig-
ure that, FA-based GM has very low water sorptivity for all type of
mortars. The values are ranged between (0.0222–0.0262) mm/
min0.5. Geopolymer mortar with combined sand shows better
result (0.0222–0.0233) mm/min0.5, compared to the others. Better
results may be attributed to their denser structure which was
obtained from filling of the pores by various size particles. Further-
more, the aggregate grading (04) mm had better results in all
types of sand, this may be due to the fact that grade (04) mm
has all sizes of particles and more fines fill the pores.

Fig. 14. Correlation of compressive strength and splitting tensile strength.

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
10 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Fig. 15. Effect of type and grading of aggregate on the sorptivity.

3.4. Water absorption 4. Conclusions

Water absorption is the difference in a sample weight under
fully saturated and oven dried conditions. The tested specimen
was cube (50
50
50) mm, the water absorption test were con-
ducted at age of 7 day. Fig. 16 shows the water absorption of FA-
based GM for the change in grading and type of aggregates. Water
absorption is related to the open porosity, and the porosity is a
very important factor in the mechanical performance of the pro-
duced geopolymer mortar.
It can be concluded from the results that GM specimen having
natural river sand and grade (0–4 mm), showed maximum water
absorption of 10.80%. Whereas, specimen having combined sand
(crushed limestone 50% and natural sand 50%) with grade 0–4
mm revealed minimum water absorption of 8.05%. Moreover, the
possible reason for this decrease may be due to the water absorp-
tion depending on the porosity of the mortar. When crushed lime-
stone is mixed with natural sand, which contains high amount of
finer particles lead to a reduction in the spaces between particles
and the pores become less and pore sizes decreases. The workabil-
ity of combined aggregate mortars are better as a result of the fact
that alkaline activator disperse among particles.
It was also observed that grading of aggregate affects the water
absorption of geopolymer mortar, grade (04) mm of aggregates
shows less water absorption of FA based GM compared to other
grading, because grade (04) mm is uniformly graded, it has a
lower void content than single-sized aggregate due to proper par-
ticle packing.
The motivation of the study was mentioned above that in the
literature there are very limited studies on the effects of aggregates
on the properties of the geopolymer concrete. For example in the
study of Pacheco-Torgal et al. [30], they reported that the size of
aggregate indicated significant effect solely on the tensile strength.
Aggregates obtained from limestone yielded a chemical bond to
the geopolymeric paste but experienced higher shrinkage. They
also emphasized that no well-known porous ITZ was observed in
geopolymeric mine waste mud binders.
This paper presents the summary of study carried out to inves-
tigate the influence of aggregate content on the mechanical and
absorption characteristics of geopolymer mortar (GM).
By analyzing and comparing the behaviors and properties of
each type of aggregate, it was observed that:
1. Type of aggregate shows great effect on flow table test results of
geopolymer mortar. Using crushed limestone resulted in low
mortar flow while combined sand shows better flow. On the
other hand, geopolymer mortar including natural sand shows
better flowability compared to other aggregates. The effect of
grading was also verified experimentally. Differences in grading
resulted in differences in the flow; coarse grading of sand
caused higher flow as a result of lower specific surface area.
2. It was found that GM possesses a high early compressive
strength. Compressive strength in all types of aggregates does
not vary significantly over time. The highest compressive

Fig. 16. Effects of grading and type of fine aggregate on the water absorption.

Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
 K. Mermerdasß et al. / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
strength of geopolymer mortar (47.83 MPa) was obtained in
crushed limestone and grade (24) mm after 1 day of curing,
and the lowest compressive strength (28.25 MPa) was observed
in natural river sand and grading of (01) mm.
3. According to the results, the splitting tensile strength is propor-
tional to compressive strength in all types and all grades of
aggregates. It was observed that splitting tensile strength grad-
ually increased with the increase of compressive strength.
4. Based on the results, the combined sand-limestone, which
includes 50% river sand and 50% crushed limestone, shows less
water absorption than other aggregates. It was also stated that
grade (04) mm has the lowest water absorption compared
with other grades in each type of aggregate.
5. Water sorptivity in GM for all type of sand aggregate is very
low. Combined sand-limestone shows the lowest sorptivity
among other types of aggregates. Also, the grading 0–4 mm
shows the less sorptivity than the other grades in all types of
aggregates.
5. Recommendation for future study
In the light of the findings presented in the paper and investi-
gating some literature works focusing on various types of binders
[31–35], the following recommendation for the researchers and
practitioner can be suggested. For example, a critical further inves-
tigation of the particle shape of the used aggregates together with
detailed investigation of the aggregate-binder interface in the
geopolymer mortar is highly recommended to clarify the mechan-
ical and absorption behaviors of geopolymer concretes. Moreover,
geopolymer mortars with different aggregates and base materials
can be investigated. Mermerdasß et al. [33] indicated an optimiza-
tion study for the production parameters for lightweight geopoly-
mer mortars. From this point it can also be suggested that the
properties of geopolymers with different types of aggregates and
binder properties can be optimized by analytical methods like
response surface method.
References
[1] D. Wiyono Antoni, D. Hardjito, Improving the durability of pozzolan concrete
using alkaline solution and geopolymer coating, Proc. Eng. 125 (2015) 747–
753.
[2] D.L.Y. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, Effect of elevated temperatures on geopolymer
paste, mortar and concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 40 (2010) 334–339.
[3] A. Fernandez-Jimenez, A. Palomo, Engineering properties of alkali-activated fly
ash concrete, ACI Mater. J. 103 (2) (2006) 106–112.
[4] Sindhunata J. van Deventer, G. Llukey, H. Xu, Effect of curing temperature and
silicate concentration on fly-ash-based geopolymerization, Indus Eng.
ChemRes. 45 (2006) 3559–3568.
[5] K. Neupane, D. Bajewa, R. Shrestha, D. Chalmers, P. Sleep, Mechanical
properties of geopolymer concrete: applicability of relationship defined by
AS 3600, Concr. Austr. 40 (2014) 50–56.
[6] T. Bakharev, J. Sanjayan, Y. Cheng, Alkali activation of Australian slag cements,
Cem. Concr. Res. 29 (1999) 113–120.
[7] J. Davidovits, High-alkali cements for 21st century concretes, vol. 144, ACI
Special Publication, SP, 1994, pp. 383–398.
[8] H.Y. Zhang, D. Kodur, B. Wu, L. Cao, F. Wang, Thermal behavior and mechanical
properties of geopolymer mortar after exposure to elevated temperatures,
Constr. Build. Mater. 109 (2016) 17–24.
[9] R. Rajamma, J.A. Labrincha, V.M. Ferreira, Alkali activation of biomass fly ash–
metakaolin blends, Fuel 98 (2012) 265–271.
Please cite this article in press as: K. Mermerdasß et al., Effect of aggregate properties on the mechanical and absorption characteristics of geopolymer mor-
tar, Eng. Sci. Tech., Int. J. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2017.11.009
11
[10] T. Bakharev, J.G. Sanjayan, Y.B. Cheng, Resistance of alkali-activated slag
concrete to alkali–aggregate reaction, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (2001) 331–334.
[11] J. Davidovits, Properties of geopolymer cements, in: Kiev (Ed.), First
International Conference on Alkaline Cements and Concretes, 1, 1994, pp.
131–149.
[12] K. Daniel, J. Sanjayan, K. Sagoe-Crentsil, The Behaviour of Geopolymer Paste
and Concrete at Elevated Temperatures, in: International Conference on
Pozzolan, Concrete and Geopolymer, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 2006, pp. 105–118.
[13] B.V. Rangan, Fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Research Report GC 4,
Engineering Faculty, Curtin University of Technology, 2008.
[14] B.P. Hudson, Modification to the fine aggregate angularity test investigation
into the way we measure fine aggregate angularity, in: Proceedings of the 7th
Annual Symposium, International Center for Aggregate Research (ICAR)
Symposium, 1999.
[15] J.L. Lafrenz, Aggregate grading control for PCC pavements: improving
constructability of concrete pavements by assuring consistency of mixes, in:
Proceedings, Fifth Annual International Center for Aggregates Research
Symposium, Austin, Texas, 1997.
[16] J.M. Shilstone, Changes in concrete aggregate standards: coarse and fine
aggregates complying with ASTM C33 can contribute to problem concrete
mixtures, Constr. Specifier 47 (1994). 118 118.
[17] C. Sreenivasulu, J.G. Jawahar, M.V.S. Reddy, D.P. Kumar, Effect of fine aggregate
blending on short-term mechanical properties of geopolymer concrete, Asian J.
Civ. Eng. (BHRC) 17 (5) (2016) 537–550.
[18] S. Mane, H.S. Jadhav, Investigation of geopolymer mortar and concrete under
high temperature, Magnesium 2 (2012) 384–390.
[19] Q. Wang, Z. Ding, J. Da, K. Ran, Z. Sui, Factors influencing bonding strength of
geopolymer-aggregate interfacial transition zone, Adv. Mater. Res. 224 (2011)
1–7.
[20] P. Nuaklong, V. Sata, P. Chindaprasirt, Influence of recycled aggregate on fly ash
geopolymer concrete properties, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 2300–2307.
[21] N. Tenn, F. Allou, C. Petit, J. Absi, S. Rossignol, Formulation of new materials
based on geopolymer binders and different road aggregates, Cer. Int. 41 (2015)
5812–5820.
[22] S.G. Jahromi, Estimation of resistance to moisture destruction in asphalt
mixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (2009) 2324–2331.
[23] U. Bagampadde, U. Isacsson, B.M. Kiggundu, Impact of bitumen and aggregate
composition on stripping in bituminous mixtures, Mater. Struct. 39 (2006)
303–315.
[24] B. Joseph, G. Mathew, Influence of aggregate content on the behavior of fly ash
based geopolymer concrete, Scientia Iranica 19 (5) (2012) 1188–1194.
[25] ASTM C618, Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined
Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete, American Society for Testing and
Materials, USA, 2003.
[26] Kushal Ghosh, Partha Ghosh, Effect Of Na2O/Al2O3, SiO2/Al2O3 and W/B ratio
on setting time and workability of flyash based geopolymer, Int. J. Eng. Res.
Appl. (IJERA) ISSN 2(4) (2012) 2142–2147.
[27] A.R. Kotwal, Y.J. Kim, J. Hu, V. Sriraman, Characterization and early age physical
properties of ambient cured geopolymer mortar based on class C fly ash, Int. J.
Concr. Struct. Mater. 9 (1) (2015) 35–43.
[28] D. Hardjito, B.V. Rangan, Development and properties of low-calcium fly ash
based geopolymer concrete, Research report GC1, Curtin University of
Technology, Australia, Perth, 103 s, 2005.
[29] J. Davidovits, Chemistry of geopolymeric systems, terminology, in: Paper
presented at the Geopolymere ’99 International Conference, Saint-Quentin,
France, 1999.
[30] F. Pacheco-Torgal, J. Castro-Gomes, S. Jalali, Investigations about the effect of
aggregates on strength and microstructure of geopolymeric mine waste mud
binders, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (6) (2007) 933–941.
[31] A. Nikolov, I. Rostovsky, H. Nugteren, Geopolymer materials based on natural
zeolite, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 6 (June 2017) 198–205.
[32] S. Selmani, A. Sdiri, S. Bouaziz, E. Joussein, S. Rossignol, Effects of metakaolin
addition on geopolymer prepared from natural kaolinitic clay, Appl. Clay Sci.
146 (15) (September 2017) 457–467.
[33] K. Mermerdasß, Z. Algın, S.M. Oleiwi, D.E. Nassani, Optimization of lightweight
GGBFS and FA geopolymer mortars by response surface method, Constr. Build.
Mater. 139 (15) (May 2017) 159–171.
[34] T. Yang, Q. Wu, H. Zhu, Z. Zhang, Geopolymer with improved thermal stability
by incorporating high-magnesium nickel slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 155 (30)
(November 2017) 475–484.
[35] Y.M. Liew, C.Y. Heah, A. Mohd-Mustafa, H. Kamarudin, Structure and
properties of clay-based geopolymer cements: a review, Progr. Mater. Sci. 83
(October 2016) 595–629.