Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Synthesis and characterization of sustainable geopolymer green clay

bricks: An alternative to burnt clay brick
Sahar Iftikhar a,b, Khuram Rashid a,⇑, Ehsan Ul Haq c, Idrees Zafar d, Fahad K. Alqahtani e, M. Iqbal Khan f
a
Department of Architectural Engineering and Design, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan
b
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Leads University, Lahore, Pakistan
c
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Main GT Road, 54890 Lahore, Pakistan
d
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Al Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, P O Box 5701, Riyadh 11432, Saudi Arabia
e
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, King Saud University,KSA, P O Box 800, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia
f
Department of Civil Engineering & Managing Director, Center of Excellence for Concrete Research and Testing, College of Engineering, King Saud University, KSA, P O.Box 800,
Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia

h i g h l i g h t s

Synthesis of geopolymer green brick by using clay and fly ash as precursors.

Optimize the proportion of both precursors to achieve the desired performance.

Comparison of Physico-mechncial properties with the codes for burnt clay bricks.

Characterization of geopolymer brick through FTIR and XRD analysis.

Sustainable green brick was developed by using 40 wt% clay and 60 wt% fly ash.

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

Article history: Clay is a material that is rich in oxides of aluminum and silicon, which are also abundant in fly ash, and
Received 26 December 2019 have strong potential to be used as a precursor for the synthesis of a sustainable geopolymer green brick.
Received in revised form 25 April 2020 This experimental work was designed to optimize the amount of clay and fly ash as precursors. Eleven
Accepted 20 May 2020
mix proportions were designed, the clay was replaced by fly ash from 0 to 100 wt%, At macro-scale,
Available online 18 June 2020
the physical and mechanical properties of resultant geopolymer bricks were assessed and compared with
the codes for a conventional fired clay brick. It was observed that the brick with 30 to 60 wt% fly ash hav-
Keywords:
ing; low density, allowable water absorption and high compressive strength can be used as a load bearing
Fly ash-clay composite
Sustainable construction materials
material. At micro level, the geopolymerization was assessed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spec-
Geopolymer green clay brick troscopy, which was also verified by the anorthite peak in the X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. The XRD
Physical and mechanical properties results are complimented with the FTIR and verify the gain in mechanical strength of geopolymer bricks
Comparison with burnt clay brick by polycondensation. The resultant geopolymer green brick is a sustainable construction material with
Chemical and mineralogical analysis smooth manufacturing process along with superior physical and mechanical properties as compared to
a conventional brick.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction is the design and manufacturing process is hardly changed. The

precursor is still the same; i.e. clay mixed with water. The practice
Brick is the oldest construction material known to humankind can be categorized into seven simple steps, i.e. clay preparation,
[1]. Over 1.3 trillion bricks are produced worldwide, annually. Pak- mixing, sun drying, packing into kiln, firing and then unpacking
istan, being 3rd largest brick producing country of South Asia, has [3]. The traditional brick kiln is heated up to 1000–1500 °C, where,
18,000 brick kilns that produce 45 billion bricks per annum [2]. alumina, silica and iron are converted into fused glass which act
Although bricks are being used for thousands of years, yet the irony like binding agent that provide adhesion. The kiln is then cooled
for several days to normalize the temperature, so, the process is
rather hectic and highly energy and time consuming [4].
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Architectural Engineering and Design,
University of Engineering and Technology, Main GT Road, 54890 Lahore, Pakistan.
The use of crushers for raw material extraction, mixers for mix-
E-mail address: khuram_ae@uet.edu.pk (K. Rashid). ing and relevant technology has helped a lot in making the process

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119659
0950-0618/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

efficient yet it has certain disadvantages such as the machine whereas degree of geopolymerization was assessed at micro level.
baked bricks do not let cement stick to its face. On the other hand, The optimum composition developed were 40 wt% fly ash 60 wt%
the manual process is laborious, ineffective, time-taking, painstak- clay, 50 wt% fly ash 50 wt% clay, and 60 wt% fly ash 40 wt% clay,
ing, less efficient, need large working space and adversely affecting 18 wt% Na2SiO3, 7 wt% NaOH and 2 wt% water.
the lives of kiln workers [5,6]. These restraints gave rise to the need
for development of efficient methods and techniques for brick 1.1. Significance of research
production.
Apart from methods of production the emerging concerns As compared to the conventional methods this research utilizes
related sustainability led human beings towards investigations in locally available precursor materials with geopolymerization tech-
order to formulate sustainable, lightweight and cheaper construc- nique. This method leads to fuel economy as lesser amounts of
tion materials. In this regard, numerous researches have been per- energy is required for this method i.e.70–110 °C curing tempera-
formed to develop sustainable construction materials, by ture, consistently decreasing the amount of CO2 emissions. As a
incorporating waste materials in bricks [6–9]. Moreover, the rapid result, a green sustainable construction material, with superior
wave of industrialization stimulated waste production which cre- mechanical properties in terms of compressive strength, was
ated a severe problem in terms of waste disposing and handling. developed. In addition, due to adaptation of oven curing method
Many researchers had investigated the use of by-products such and geopolymerization process, a substantial amount of water is
as fly ash [7], slag [10] and silica fumes [11]. The success of these conserved in this geopolymer green brick production. Hence the
researches has amplified further research and has proved a great production of geopolymer green bricks will be a smooth process
help for governments in terms of waste handling [6,12]. It has been without causing much fatigue and also providing a sustainable
noticed that the incorporation of waste in bricks reduces the com- construction material with superior mechanical and physical
pressive strength [13,14], so this area is of critical importance. The characteristics.
compressive strength of cigarette butt reinforced brick varies from
3 to 12 MPa which fulfils the minimum limit of 3 MPa for compres-
sive strength of clay bricks as specified by Australian Standard AS/ 2. Experimental methodology
NZS 4455.1:2008 [15].
Fly ash is a by-product largely consists of the particles driven 2.1. Materials
out after coal burning in coal fired power plants. The constituents
may vary but the main components are silicon dioxide, aluminum The precursor materials used to synthesize geopolymer green
oxide and calcium oxide. Minute percentages of chromium, arsenic brick were clay and fly ash, whereas sodium hydro-oxide (NaOH)
and other metals are also found [16]. Fly ash is pozzolanic material and sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) were used as alkaline activators.
which has siliceous and aluminous components that form cement The clay used in the investigation was collected from a local brick
[17]. It is classified into class C and class F, where class C fly ash kiln in the Punjab province of the Pakistan in order to reach at a
contains higher amount of calcium [18]. Fly ash can be used as pre- concrete conclusion when compared with fired clay brick proper-
cursor as it can easily be activated and undergo enhanced geopoly- ties. The characterization of clay was carried out according to
merization reaction under certain curing conditions [19,20]. ASTM D-4318 [28] and particle size was analyzed by sieve analysis
Geopolymers are covalently bonded non crystalline amorphous according to ASTM D-6913 [29]. Physical characteristics of the clay
networks [21]. Solid aluminosilicates when comes in reaction with are described in Table 1. The fly ash was collected from DG cement
highly concentrated alkaline activator solutions produce alkali- Punjab Pakistan and its chemical composition is provided in
aluminosilicate material, which is called geopolymer [22]. This Table 2. It can be observed that fly ash falls in the category of Class
material possesses properties like cementitious materials with a F according to ASTM C-618 [30]. It was observed that minerals like
wide range of applications, considerably reducing the toxic emis- quartz, mullite, anorthite, calcite, hematite and magnetite are pre-
sions [23]. Mostly, owing to the precursor materials, the properties sent in fly ash. The NaOH solution of 14 Molar along with Na2SiO3
of resultant geopolymer may vary ranging from higher compres- (water glass) of specific gravity 1.35 g/cm3 were used. The densi-
sive strength, lower thermal conductivity and low or fast shrinking. ties of precursor materials and alkaline activators were calculated
Commonly known by the name of geopolymers, the material is also and presented in Table 3.
known as low-temperature synthesized aluminosilicates because
they are manufactured at low temperature such as 100 °C [24]. 2.2. Specimen preparation
A large number of studies have been carried out in the field of
geopolymers. Researchers have studied geopolymers by using Geopolymer green brick was cast by mixing the precursors and
metakaolin and calcined clays [25]. It was found out that high liq- alkaline activators. The amount of solids was 73 wt% and liquid
uid/ solid ratio, in case of geopolymerization of calcined clay, accel- was 27 wt%. The solid constituents were clay and fly ash and their
erated dissolution and hydrolysis. Another study used slag as proportions were varied to cast 11 types of specimens; clay was
precursor and the delay in setting time was investigated [26]. A replaced by fly ash by an amount of 0–100% by weight. The details
similar research was carried out by using metakaolin and blast fur- of mix proportions for each type of specimen are mentioned in
nace slag as raw materials and concluded that geopolymers are
excellent anti-corrosion materials, therefore, can be used in coating
Table 1
of marine concrete [27]. Up to authors knowledge not a single Physical properties of clay.
study has been conducted that investigated the raw clay as precur-
Description Value
sor in geopolymerization for synthesis of green brick. However,
clay is rich in oxides of aluminum and silicon and have a strong Specific gravity 2.75
potential to be used as precursor. Liquid limit (%) 32
Plastic limit (%) 26
Therefore, the present study is carried out by making a sustain- Grain size distribution analysis
able construction materials called geopolymer green brick by using Gravel % 0
clay and fly ash as precursors along with alkaline activators. Both Sand % 3
macro-scale and micro-scale properties were checked, the physical Silt & Clay % 97
and mechanical properties of bricks were assessed at macro level,
 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659 3

Table 2 merization and mineralogical compositions were assessed. The

Chemical proportion of fly ash. detail of each test at macro and micro scale have been explained
Description Oxides (%) in the following sub-sections.
SiO2 56.34
Al2O3 23.08 2.3.1. Density and porosity
Fe2O3 6.41 Bulk density of each sample was calculated by mass to volume
CaO 9.02 ratio according to BS EN 12390–7:2009 [31]. Coupled with that,
MgO 1.70
K2O 0.56
true density of the samples was calculated according to ASTM
Na2O 0.28 D854-14 [32] by using the Eq. (1), where, m1 is weight of pycnome-
SO3 Nil ter and water, m2 is the weight of m1 and powder sample outside
Cl 0.025 the pycnometer and m3 is weight of m1 and powder sample inside
Sum 97.42
the pycnometer. Apparent density is calculated by using the sam-
Residue on 45 mm 30 to 40
Unburnt carbon less than 3% ple in pallet form, whereas; true density is calculated by using the
Moisture less than 1 sample in powder form. Open porosity takes open pores of the
sample into account, Closed Porosity considers closed pores as
well, whereas in case of total porosity all types of pores are
Table 3 included. The total porosity of all the specimens was calculated
Density of raw materials. from the Eq. (2), whereas the close and open porosities were mea-
Material Density (kg/m3)
sured from Eq. (3) and Eq. (4), respectively.
 
Clay 1200 m2  m1
TrueDensity ¼ Densityofwater: ð1Þ
Fly Ash 770 m2  m3
NaOH 1350
Na2SiO3 1460  
BulkDensity
TotalPorosityð%Þ ¼ 1 :100 ð2Þ
TrueDensity
Table 4. The amount of fly ash presents the specimen identity, e.g.  
ApparentDensity
FA-20 means fly ash was used by an amount of 20 wt%. In liquids, ClosePorosityð%Þ ¼ 1 :100 ð3Þ
the amount of NaOH and Na2SiO3 was 7 wt% and 18 wt%, respec- TrueDensity
tively. About 2 wt% water was also used during mixing of speci-
men. It can be observed from Table 4 that the liquid amount was OpenPorosityð%Þ ¼ Totalporosity  Closeporosity ð4Þ
constant for all types of mixtures.
Specimen was prepared by mixing clay and fly ash in dry state 2.3.2. Water absorption
until it attained a homogeneous color. The alkaline activator solu- Water absorption test was conducted according to ASTM C830
tion was used for wet mixing, NaOH and Na2SiO3 solution were [33] to compare the water absorption of geopolymer green brick
used simultaneously. The paste was mixed with the help of electric with that of normal brick and to further clarify the durability and
mixer for 2–3 min. Cube molds of size 50 mm were prepared, the quality of the geopolymer green brick. The samples were kept at
slurry was poured into 3 layers with simultaneous compaction in 110 °C for 24 h and dry weight (W1) of every sample was noted
order to ensure homogenous poring and perfect surface finishing. down. Then the samples were immersed in water for 24 h. After
The air voids were removed by adequate compaction through that the samples were taken out of water, wiped with cloth and
vibrating table in the laboratory. The samples, while keeping in wet weight (W2) was noted down. Lastly, the water absorption
molds, were sealed with polythene sheets and put in oven at was calculated by the following Eq. (5).
70 °C for 24 h. Then samples were demolded and further cured  
in oven at 110 °C for next 24 h. Then samples were placed at lab- W2  W1
WaterAbsorptionð%Þ ¼ :100 ð5Þ
oratory condition for testing. W1

2.3. Test 2.3.3. Compressive strength

Compressive strength is the most important parameter to
Physical and mechanical properties of geopolymer green bricks determine the mechanical strength of the material. The compres-
were investigated at macro-scale level by conducting several tests sive strength was measured by using 2000 kN microcomputer dig-
to evaluate; density, porosity, water absorption and compressive ital display hydraulic universal testing machine in accordance with
strength, in the laboratory. At micro-level, the degree of geopoly- ASTM C 109 [34].

Table 4
Composition of eleven mixtures of geopolymer green brick.

Sample Fly ash (wt.%) Clay (wt.%) Fly Ash (kg/m3) Clay (kg/m3) NaOH (kg/m3) Na2SiO3 (kg/m3)
FA-00 0.0 73.0 0.0 876.0 94.5 262.8
FA-10 7.3 65.7 56.2 788.4 94.5 262.8
FA-20 14.7 58.4 113.1 700.8 94.5 262.8
FA-30 21.9 51.1 168.6 613.2 94.5 262.8
FA-40 29.2 43.8 224.8 525.6 94.5 262.8
FA-50 36.5 36.5 281.0 438.0 94.5 262.8
FA-60 43.8 29.2 337.2 350.4 94.5 262.8
FA-70 51.1 21.9 393.4 262.8 94.5 262.8
FA-80 58.4 14.7 449.6 176.4 94.5 262.8
FA-90 65.7 7.3 505.8 87.6 94.5 262.8
FA-100 73.0 0.0 562.1 0.0 94.5 262.8
4 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

2.3.4. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction being lighter in weight and vice versa. Bulk density and porosity
Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis of each are inter-related in inverse manner, therefore, if the material is
composition was done on JASCO FTIR-4100. The FTIR spectra was porous in nature, its bulk density will be smaller. As shown in
scanned (400 – 4000 cm1) with resolution of 4 cm1 and scan rate Table 3, fly ash has very low density that is why it is a lightweight
was 2 mm/sec. In order to analyze different phases during geopoly- material, consequently, by enhancing the amount of fly ash the
merization, X-ray Diffraction is performed by Philips PW3710 MPD resultant brick becomes lighter in nature and the density of that
Control with Cu Ka radiations that were generated at 20 mA and particular sample decreases. Fig. 2 gives a clearer picture of the
40 kV. The summary of materials and tests conducted in this work trend that by increasing the amount of fly ash the bulk density
has been summarized in Fig. 1. decreases. According to Chinese National Standard the bulk density
of the clay brick ranges from 1800-2000 kg/m3 (Table 6), it is clear
3. Results and discussion from the Fig. 2 that the bulk density of all types of geopolymer
green brick is lesser than that for conventional clay bricks (1800–
The physical and mechanical properties of geopolymer green 2000 kg/m3), which brings the conclusion that the geopolymer
bricks were investigated. The summary of all experimental results green brick is lighter in weight, that will ensure lightweight
is given in Table 5 along with respective standard deviations. The construction.
discussion on each property has been made separately and pre- Bulk density of the brick is the density inclusive of open and
sented in following sub-sections. The results, for better under- closed pores, whereas; the apparent density is inclusive of closed
standing, are divided into macro-scale and micro-scale pores only, and the true density is exclusive of all the pores. These
properties. Macro-scale properties comprise physical and mechan- densities were used to calculate open, closed and total porosity.
ical properties, whereas; micro-scale properties cover FTIR spec- The trends of bulk, apparent and true density are given in Fig. 2.
troscopy and XRD analysis. The least value of bulk density was obviously observed for all types
of geopolymer green brick specimens as compared to the apparent
3.1. Macro-Scale properties and true density. Whereas, the true density is maximum at all
amounts of fly ash as compared to bulk and apparent density.
3.1.1. Density and porosity The open, closed and total porosity of geopolymer green bricks
In order to determine the feasibility of using a material for con- are given in Fig. 3, it was observed that the trend of increase in
struction, the parameter of bulk density is of paramount impor- porosity with the fly ash is consistent for three types of porosities;
tance. Lesser bulk density means more porous material while open, close and total. It was obvious that the total porosity will be

Fig. 1. Summary of the methodology of this work.

 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659 5

Table 5
Physical and mechanical properties of geopolymer green bricks.

Specimen ID Bulk Density (kg/m3) SD. Apparent Density (kg/m3) True Density (kg/m3) Water Absorption (%) SD. Comp. Strength (MPa) SD.
FA-00 1660 26.97 1721 1821 13.51 0.54 2.91 0.20
FA-10 1640 28.88 1746 1788 12.67 1.28 4.43 0.59
FA-20 1647 52.85 1789 1895 11.09 0.89 11.37 0.81
FA-30 1690 23.30 1894 2164 11.85 0.42 15.15 1.25
FA-40 1710 15.20 1878 1946 11.61 1.50 12.90 1.50
FA-50 1650 21.69 1720 1731 13.00 1.11 15.07 0.80
FA-60 1650 41.18 1800 1913 13.65 1.52 17.10 0.39
FA-70 1560 1.53 1579 1667 16.30 0.65 10.77 1.50
FA-80 1550 93.44 1563 1620 22.43 0.43 6.50 0.33
FA-90 1260 7.49 1425 1500 31.86 1.26 2.74 0.11
FA-100 1230 44.64 1280 1400 32.55 1.61 3.18 0.27

SD. = standard deviation; Comp. = compressive.

Fig. 2. Bulk, apparent and true density of geopolymer green bricks. (For interpre- Fig. 3. Open, closed and total porosity of geopolymer green bricks. (For interpre-
tation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the tation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the
web version of this article.) web version of this article.)

3.1.2. Water absorption

me more and close porosity will be least, which was strictly fol-
Water absorption is a significant feature to assess the durability,
lowed in all type of specimens. As, it has been said earlier, fly ash
thermal conductivity and quality of a brick. If the particles at
is a highly porous material while being lesser dense as compared
micro-structure level are jam-packed, they would not let water
to clay, therefore, with an increase in the amount of fly ash, poros-
to infiltrate, moreover density will be higher in that case and vice
ity increases. The cenospheres being semi-crystalline in nature, get
versa. The water absorption of the geopolymer green bricks is
dissolved leaving behind huge amount of activated mass depend-
checked with reference to Indian National Standard and Chinese
ing upon the relative percentage of fly ash used [35]. This activated
National Standard (Table 6). It is obvious from the results that
mass gives rise to higher and higher degree of geopolymerization.
due to fly ash being a porous material, the water absorption rate
Hence, higher the percentage of fly ash, higher the degree of
increases with an increase in percentage of fly ash. It is shown in
geopolymerization. But as the cenospheres are centrally hollow,
Fig. 4 that the water absorption of geopolymer green bricks with
so this addition of emptiness rises with the rise of fly ash. This
0–60 wt% fly ash is in the region of 1st class bricks, whereas; the
fly ash derived emptiness contributes to overall porosity of
water absorption of geopolymer green brick with 70% fly ash is
geopolymer which in turn decrease the density of the consequent
in the region of 2nd class brick and the samples with 90–100 wt
material [36].
% fly ash are above 2nd class brick zone in terms of water absorp-

Table 6
Different Standard used in this study testing.

Standard Brick Description Bulk Density (kg/m3) Water Absorption (%) Compressive Strength (MPa)
Chinese National Standard 1st Class Brick 1800–2000 15 (Max.) 15
2nd Class Brick 1800–2000 19 (Max.) 9.8
ASTM Severe Weathering —————— —————— 20.7
Moderate Weathering —————— —————— 17.2
Negligible Weathering —————— —————— 10.3
Indian Standard 1st class —————— 15 (Max.) 5–10 (load bearing)
2nd Class —————— 20 (Max.) 3–5 (non-load bearing)
Brazilian Standard —————— —————— —————— 1.5 (Min.)

Max. = maximum; Min. = minimum.

6 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

Fig. 4. Water absorption by all types of geopolymer green bricks. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of
this article.)

tion. Coupled with that, when compared to Chinese National Stan- need higher sintering temperature aside. At 80–100 wt% fly ash
dard for water absorption, the geopolymer green bricks with 0– the samples again displayed lesser compressive strength as fly
60 wt% fly ash are in the zone of 1st class brick, the brick with ash is lightweight, porous material as well as the cenospheres at
70 wt% fly ash is in the zone of 2nd class, the brick with 80 wt% microlevel are hollow and cracked that prohibit the material from
in 3rd class, while the geopolymer green brick with 90–100 wt% achieving higher compressive strength. The relationship of com-
fly ash fall above the 3rd class brick zone in terms of their water pressive strength with the amount of fly ash was also established
absorption percentage. The reason for the trend, as stated earlier by applying regression analysis (polynomial), and concerned equa-
is attributed to the fly ash being more porous and less dense in nat- tion and R2 are mentioned in Fig. 5.
ure than clay. In another manner, it can be said that by decreasing Afterwards the compressive strength of geopolymer green
the amount of clay, water absorption increases. When hollow bricks was tested against four standards; CNS 382 [39], ASTM
shells of fly ash are activated their surfaces are dissolved (being C62-13a, 2013 [40], Brazilian Standard NBR 6064 (ABNT 1983a)
semi-crystalline in nature) [37]. As soon as the surfaces are acti- [41] and Indian Standard (IS) 1077 (2007) [42], the summary of
vated/dissolved, cenosphere leave behind hollow skeletons, which the range for compressive strength is mentioned in Table 6. The
actually cause generation of porosity stepwise increasing with the Indian and Chinese Standards are used as both countries have same
increase in relative fly ash content [38]. The regression analysis environmental, weathering, domestic and constructional condi-
was also conducted and relationship of water absorption by tions as Pakistan, whereas; ASTM is a renowned universally
geopolymer green brick with the amount of fly ash was established accepted standard. Chinese National Standard divides bricks into
and presented in Fig. 4, the value of coefficient of determination two categories named as 1st class and 2nd class bricks, with com-
(R2) was 0.9571, which present a significant influence of the pressive strength 14.7 MPa for 1st class and 9.8 MPa for 2nd class.
amount of FA on the water absorption by geopolymer green brick. In comparison with Chinese National Standard it was found that
the samples with 30, 50 and 60 wt% fly ash fall above the region
3.1.3. Compressive strength of 1st class brick, whereas the bricks with 20, 40 and 70% fly ash
Compressive strength is the most important factor while deter- are above 2nd class brick zone and 0, 10, 80–100 wt% fly ash are
mining the durability, feasibility and mechanical strength of a below 2nd class brick region as mentioned in Fig. 5(a). The Indian
material, it was measured for all compositions of bricks and pre- Standard categorizes the compressive strength into two ranges, i.e.
sented in Fig. 5. The compressive strength ranged from 2.73 MPa load-bearing range and non-load-bearing range. A keener look at
to 17.10 MPa (Table 5). It was observed that by increasing the geopolymer green bricks casted in this study in comparison with
amount of fly ash the compressive strength of corresponding sam- Indian Standard for compressive strength shows that bricks with
ple was increased, but this tendency exists up to 60 wt% fly ash, 0, 10, 90 and 100% fly ash are in the region of non-load-bearing
afterwards upon further increasing the content of fly ash, compres- range, whereas; the bricks with 20–70 wt% fly ash fall above
sive strength was decreased. load-bearing range (Fig. 5(b)). Furthermore, when checked with
The samples with zero percent fly ash (FA-00) exhibited less reference to ASTM standard for compressive strength the geopoly-
strength because clay is a hydrothermal product in which silica mer green bricks with 30–70% fly ash fall between negligible
and alumina was present in tetrahedral symmetry and in the pro- weathering and moderate weathering zone, while the geopolymer
cess of geopolymerization only surface of clay is activated, more- green bricks with 0–10 wt% fly ash, 80–100 wt% fly ash are below
over, in case of normal brick manufacturing 25 wt% water is negligible weathering range (Fig. 5(c)). Finally, Brazilian Standard
added for mixing purposes and is in this study only 2 wt% of water sets a minimum limit of 1.5 MPa, so all of the geopolymer green
was added due to which shrinkage cracks appeared (Fig. 6) at the bricks are above this minimum standard as shown in Fig. 5(d).
surface of geopolymer green brick samples with 0 and 10 wt% fly
ash, furthermore, conventional clay brick was cured at 1000 °C-1 3.1.4. Relationship between physical and mechanical properties
500 °C, whereas; the geopolymer samples were cured at 70 °C-11 Relationship between bulk density and water absorption was
0 °C. The reason for this peculiar trend is that the fly ash is a better established and presented in Fig. 7, the bulk density has the inverse
material for geopolymerization than clay, keeping the fact clay relationship with the water absorption. It was discussed in
 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659 7

Fig. 5. Compressive Strength of all types of geopolymer green brick. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version
of this article.)

Fig. 6. Shrinkage cracks appeared at the surface of samples (FA-00).

Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 that density decreases and water absorption
increases with the increase in the amount of fly ash, respectively.
Fig. 7 presents this relationship and both physical properties veri-
fies the results, as it can be easily observed that up to 60 wt% of fly
ash water absorption is within allowable range and low density Fig. 7. Relationship between bulk density and water absorption of geopolymer
results in light weight geopolymer green brick, as described by green brick. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
codes (Table 6).
Relationships were also established between physical and
mechanical properties, Fig. 8(a) present the relationship between
compressive strength and bulk density under the influence of pressive strength with water absorption is presented in Fig. 8(b),
amount of fly ash. It is obvious that compressive strength increases it has been noticed that with an increase in the water absorption
with the increase in bulk density as the dense microstructure the compressive strength decreases. To put it another way, as fly
formed. Similar trend was observed in Fig. 8(a), the less reduction ash is hydrophilic in nature, that is the reason, with an increase
at low fly ash amount was due to shrinkage cracks as explained in in the amount of fly ash the water absorption of geopolymer green
Fig. 6 and Section 3.1.3. Coupled with that, relationship of com- bricks increases.
8 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

Fig. 8. Relationship between physical and mechanical properties of geopolymer green brick. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)

3.2. Micro-scale properties print region of fly ash shows bending at 1100 cm1, whereas; shift
towards lower wavenumber is noticed in the fingerprint region of
3.2.1. FTIR analysis green bricks that ensures the geopolymerization. For the FA-00
FTIR shows that the region from 900 cm1 to 1100 cm1 is the where fly ash was zero percent and 73 percent or the entire solid
backbone of the structure, Si-O-Al bonds. The bending at precursor was clay, the Si-O-T peak appeared around 990 cm1
1490 cm1 shows H-O–H bonds, the presence of water [43]. Clay while moving towards FA-60 the peaks successively passed
is a hydrothermal product formed by the weathering of silicate towards 1000 cm1. Although the difference was minor but still
bearing rocks. Owing to the trait of clay being hydrothermal the it was there owing to the fact that clay precursors are naturally
alumina is already in tetrahedral therefore negligible shift in wave- products of hydrothermal reactions. While fly ash is produced by
length of backbone region of geopolymer green brick samples was the fusion of aluminosilicates at higher temperatures in the fur-
observed (Fig. 9). In addition, the –OH bending at 1490 cm1 naces, where the size of the molecules are smaller or glassy struc-
showed the presence of water in clay. On the other hand, the back- ture is dominant as indicated by the higher wavenumbers in fly
bone region of fly ash showed bending at 1100 cm1 that points ash; around 1100 cm1 (Fig. 9).
out the octahedral structure of alumina in fly ash. In addition to Fig. 10 shows that the oxygen in raw materials is bridged oxy-
that it has been noticed that the FTIR of fly ash shows no –OH gen. During the process of activation, the bridged oxygen changes
bending at 1490 cm1 that concludes fly ash does not contain into non-bridged oxygen. After geopolymerization, due to polycon-
water and it is not hydrothermal product that is formed in the densation the non-bridged oxygen, once again, changed to bridged
absence of water due to heating. In this perspective, when we oxygen [44]. Fig. 11 shows degree of geopolymerization, which
observe the FTIR of geopolymer bricks it is obvious that the –OH was quantified by measuring the area of the peak of FTIR curves
bending appears with the increase in clay content. The finger- (Fig. 9) [45]. By keeping the area under the peak of fly ash curve
as reference, all samples of geopolymer green brick verify the
mechanism of geopolymerization. The samples FA-40, FA-50 and
FA-60 shows higher degree of geopolymerization and in combina-
tion to density and porosity, they possess higher compressive
strength. The reduction in compressive strength with higher
amount of fly ash, although with high degree of geopolymerization,
was due to more porous nature of the material as explained in
Section 3.1.3.

3.2.2. XRD analysis

In order to investigate different phases present in geopolymer
green bricks, XRD analysis was performed. Fig. 12 shows the
results of XRD, the results of XRD compliment the results of FTIR.
The peak of anorthite (A) as highlighted in Fig. 12 shows the phe-
nomenon of geopolymerization. The peak of anorthite is absent in
fly ash that shows fly ash is a material produced as process of burn-
ing. On the other hand, the presence of anorthite in clay shows it is
a naturally hydrothermal and the oxides of silica and alumina are
in tetrahedral symmetry [45]. The presence of calcite (C) is con-
firmed in the XRD analysis [46]. In process of geopolymerization
Fig. 9. FTIR of clay, fly ash and geopolymer green bricks. (For interpretation of the
of clay, only surface is activated as silica and alumina is already
references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of in tetrahedral symmetry. The surface activation in clay changes
this article.) the crystallinity of material. The more prominent curve of anor-
 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659 9

Fig. 10. Mechanism of geopolymerization in fly ash and clay.

4. Conclusions

In this research work, bricks were prepared by replacing the

conventional raw material (clay) by the fly ash, and strength was
gained by the geopolymerization. Eleven mix proportions were
designed to assess the physical and mechanical properties of
geopolymer green bricks at macro-scale. The chemical structure
and minerals in the geopolymer bricks were assessed through FTIR
spectroscopy and XRD analysis. Based on the experimental study
carried out on geopolymer green bricks, the following extrapola-
tions are drawn:
Bulk, apparent and true densities reduce with the addition of fly
ash, the maximum bulk density was less than 1700 kg/m3, which is
obviously less than range described in Chinese standard (1800–
2000 kg/m3), consequently, will lead to light weight sustainable
material.
Porosity and water absorption increase with the fly ash addi-
Fig. 11. Degree of geopolymerization for fly ash and geopolymer green bricks. (For
tion, up to 60 wt% addition of fly ash, the water absorption by
interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred geopolymer green brick was less than 15 wt% and can be catego-
to the web version of this article.) rized as 1st class brick according to Indian and Chinese standards.
Compressive strength was assessed for all types of geopolymer
green bricks and compared with four codes. The distinct compres-
sive strength is exhibited by the bricks having fly ash amount from
30 to 60 wt% and can be used for load-bearing construction.
Relationships among physical and mechanical properties with
the addition of fly ash were established and results are consistent
with each other. Compressive strength was obviously increased
with increasing bulk density and reduced with increasing water
absorption.
FTIR analysis confirmed the geopolymerization, therefore
wavenumber moved from higher to lower value due to polycon-
densation, which attributed to increase in compressive strength.
The presence of Anorthite in XRD of geopolymer samples also con-
firms the phenomenon of geopolymerization. In addition, the
results of XRD compliment the results of FTIR.
Henceforth, it can be easily concluded that geopolymer green
bricks are lightweight and eco-friendly in nature. It has the almost
similar compressive strength parameter and reduced water
absorption factor when compared to conventional clay bricks. Fur-
ther work is still needed to formulate geopolymer green brick by
pressing instead of molding.

Fig. 12. XRD of clay, fly ash and resultant geopolymer samples. (Note: A = Anorthite,
Q = Quartz and C = Calcite). CRediT authorship contribution statement

Sahar Iftikhar: Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis.

thite in FA-40, FA-50 and FA-60 marked higher degree of geopoly- Khuram Rashid: Conceptualization, Supervision. Ehsan Ul Haq:
merization consequently higher compressive strength. Supervision. Idrees Zafar: . Fahad K. Alqahtani: . M. Iqbal Khan: .
10 S. Iftikhar et al. / Construction and Building Materials 259 (2020) 119659

Declaration of Competing Interest [23] E. Gartner, Industrially interesting approaches to ‘‘low-CO2” cements, Cem.
Concr. Res. 34 (9) (2004) 1489–1498.
[24] H. Rahier, B. Van Mele, M. Biesemans, J. Wastiels, X. Wu, Low-temperature
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan- synthesized aluminosilicate glasses, J. Mater. Sci. 31 (1) (1996) 71–79.
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared [25] Z. Zuhua, Y. Xiao, Z. Huajun, C. Yue, Role of water in the synthesis of calcined
kaolin-based geopolymer, Appl. Clay Sci. 43 (2) (2009) 218–223.
to influence the work reported in this paper.
[26] N. Li, C. Shi, Z. Zhang, Understanding the roles of activators towards setting and
hardening control of alkali-activated slag cement, Compos. B Eng. 171 (2019)
Acknowledgment 34–45.
[27] Z. Zhang, X. Yao, H. Zhu, Potential application of geopolymers as protection
coatings for marine concreteI, Basic Prop. Appl. Clay Sci. 49 (1–2) (2010) 1–6.
The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of [28] ASTM D 4318-05, Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and
Scientific Research at King Saud University for funding this work Plasticity Index of Soils, ASTM International. 100 Barr Harbor Drive PO box C-
through research group No. RG-1441-429. 700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United States, 2005.
[29] ASTM D-6913/D6913M-17, Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size
Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis, ASTM international.
References 100 Barr Harbor Drive PO box C-700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania,
United States, (2017).
[1] L.V. Miranda, J.R. Valdes, D.D. Cortes, Solar bricks for lunar construction, [30] ASTM C 618-12a, Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined
Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017) 241–246. Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete, ASTM International. 100 Barr Harbor
[2] International Labour Organization (ILO) report, (2017). Annual Report of NACG. Drive PO box C-700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United
[3] P.K. Ghoshal, Prospects and problems of brick industry, Mittal Publications States, 2012.
2008. [31] British Standard. BS EN 12390-7:2009, Testing hardened concrete, Density of
[4] H. Panda, Complete Technology Book on Asbestos, Cement, Ceramics and hardened concrete (2009).
Limestone. ASIA PACIFIC BUSINESS PRESS Inc. 2016. [32] ASTM D854-14, Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by
[5] A.A. Kadir, An overview of wastes recycling in fired clay bricks, Int. J. Int. Eng. 4 Water Pycnometer, ASTM international. 100 Barr Harbor Drive PO box C-700
(2) (2012) 53–69. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United States, (2014).
[6] S.N. Monteiro, C.M.F. Vieira, On the production of fired clay bricks from waste [33] ASTM C830-00(2016), Standard Test Methods for Apparent Porosity, Liquid
materials: A critical update, Constr. Build. Mater. 68 (2014) 599–610. Absorption, Apparent Specific Gravity, and Bulk Density of Refractory Shapes
[7] M.U. Rehman, M. Ahmad, K. Rashid, Influence of fluxing oxides from waste on by Vacuum Pressure, ASTM international. 100 Barr Harbor Drive PO box C-700
the production and physico-mechanical properties of fired clay brick: A West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United States, (2016).
review, J. Build. Eng. 27 (2020) 100965. [34] ASTM C109/109M-02. Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars
[8] R.V.R.S.P. Raut, S.A. Mandavgane, Development of sustainable construction (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens). ASTM International. 100 Barr
material using industrial and agricultural solid waste: A review of waste- Harbor Drive PO box C-700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959,
create bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 4037–4042. United States. (2002).
[9] L.A. Cecile Bories, Emeline Vedrenne, Gerard Vilarem, Fired clay bricks using [35] R. Blissett, N. Rowson, A review of the multi-component utilisation of coal fly
agricultural biomass wastes: Study and characterization, Constr. Build. Mater. ash, Fuel 97 (2012) 1–23.
91 (2015) 158–163. [36] M. Deepthi, M. Sharma, R. Sailaja, P. Anantha, P. Sampathkumaran, S.
[10] S. Malhotra, S. Tehri, Development of bricks from granulated blast furnace slag, Seetharamu, Mechanical and thermal characteristics of high density
Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (3) (1996) 191–193. polyethylene–fly ash cenospheres composites, Mater. Des. 31 (4) (2010)
[11] B. Hegazy, H.A. Fouad, A.M. Hassanain, Incorporation of water sludge, silica 2051–2060.
fume, and rice husk ash in brick making, Adv. Environ. Res. 1 (1) (2012) 83–96. [37] M.-R. Wang, D.-C. Jia, P.-G. He, Y. Zhou, Microstructural and mechanical
[12] A. Mohajerani, A.A. Kadir, L. Larobina, A practical proposal for solving the characterization of fly ash cenosphere/metakaolin-based geopolymeric
world’s cigarette butt problem: Recycling in fired clay bricks, Waste Manage. composites, Ceram. Int. 37 (5) (2011) 1661–1666.
52 (2016) 228–244. [38] S. Kumar, R. Kumar, Mechanical activation of fly ash: Effect on reaction,
[13] A.L. Murmu, A. Patel, Towards sustainable bricks production: An overview, structure and properties of resulting geopolymer, Ceram. Int. 37 (2) (2011)
Constr. Build. Mater. 165 (2018) 112–125. 533–541.
[14] Z. Zhang, Y.C. Wong, A. Arulrajah, S. Horpibulsuk, A review of studies on bricks [39] CNS382-R2002, Building with ordinary brick, National Standared Republic of
using alternative materials and approaches, Constr. Build. Mater. 188 (2018) China, 2007.
1101–1118. [40] ASTM C62-17, Standard Specification for Building Brick (Solid Masonry Units
[15] Australian/New Zealand Standard: AS/NZS 4455.1:2008, 2008. Masonary Made From Clay or Shale), ASTM International. 100 Barr Harbor Drive PO box
units, Pavers, flags and segmental retaining wall units Part 1: Masonry units; C-700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United States, 2017.
Jointly Published by Standard Australia, GPO Box 476, Sydney, NSW 2001 and [41] NBR-6064, Tijolo maciço cerâmico para alvenaria - Verificação da resistência à
Standards New Zealand, Private Bag 2439, Wellington 6020. Joint Technical. compressão - Método de Ensaio, Brazilian Assoc. Tech. Standards, 1983
Committee BD-026. [42] IS-1077, Common Burnt Clay Building Bricks – Specification, Bur. Indian
[16] J. Swanepoel, C. Strydom, Utilisation of fly ash in a geopolymeric material, Standard, (2007).
Appl. Geochem. 17 (8) (2002) 1143–1148. [43] E. ul Haq, S.K. Padmanabhan, A. Licciulli, Synthesis and characteristics of fly
[17] R. Helmuth, Fly ash in cement and, concrete (1987). ash and bottom ash based geopolymers–A comparative study, Ceramics
[18] M. Ahmaruzzaman, A review on the utilization of fly ash, Prog. Energy International 40(2) (2014) 2965-2971.
Combust. Sci. 36 (3) (2010) 327–363. [44] M.A. Cusanovich, The Chemistry of Silica (Iler, Ralph K.), Journal of Chemical
[19] P. Zhang, Y. Zheng, K. Wang, J. Zhang, A review on properties of fresh and Education 57(11) (1980) A324.
hardened geopolymer mortar, Compos. B Eng. 152 (2018) 79–95. [45] S.F.A. Zaidi, E.U. Haq, K. Nur, N. Ejaz, M. Anis-ur-Rehman, M. Zubair, M. Naveed,
[20] C.-K. Ma, A.Z. Awang, W. Omar, Structural and material performance of Synthesis & characterization of natural soil based inorganic polymer foam for
geopolymer concrete: A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 186 (2018) 90–102. thermal insulations, Constr. Build. Mater. 157 (2017) 994–1000.
[21] J. Davidovits, Geopolymer chemistry and applications, Geopolymer Institute, [46] S. Moravej, G. Habibagahi, E. Nikooee, A. Niazi, Stabilization of dispersive soils
2008. by means of biological calcite precipitation, Geoderma 315 (2018) 130–137.
[22] P. Duxson, A. Fernández-Jiménez, J.L. Provis, G.C. Lukey, A. Palomo, J.S. van
Deventer, Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art, J. Mater. Sci. 42
(9) (2007) 2917–2933.