Effect on mechanical properties of glass reinforced epoxy (GRE) pipe filled with

different geopolymer filler molarity for piping application

M. F. Abu Hashim, M. M. A. Abdullah, C. M. R. Ghazali, K. Hussin, and M. Binhussain

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020042 (2017); doi: 10.1063/1.4981864

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4981864
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1835/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Physical and mechanical properties of quarry dust waste incorporated into fired clay brick
AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020040 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981862

The effect of Ta doping to the crystal structure of La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 perovskite oxide using DFT method
AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020041 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981863

Geopolymer lightweight bricks manufactured from fly ash and foaming agent
AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020048 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981870

Density and morphology studies on bottom ash and fly ash geopolymer brick
AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020047 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981869

Effect of intermetallic phase on microstructure and mechanical properties of AA332/Mg2Si(p) composite

AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020043 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981865

Effect of different sintering temperature on fly ash based geopolymer artificial aggregate
AIP Conference Proceedings 1835, 020050 (2017); 10.1063/1.4981872
 Effect on Mechanical Properties of Glass Reinforced Epoxy
(GRE) Pipe filled with Different Geopolymer Filler Molarity
for Piping Application
M F Abu Hashim1,2,a), M M A Abdullah1,2,b), C M R Ghazali1,2,c), K Hussin1,2,d), M
Binhussain3,e)
1
Center of Excellence Geopolymer & Green Technology (CeGeoGTech), School of Material Engineering, Universiti
Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP), P. O. Box 77, d/a Pejabat Pos Besar, 01000 Kangar, Perlis Malaysia
2
Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP), 01007, P.O Box 77, D/A Pejabat Pos
Besar, Kangar, Perlis, Malaysia
3
King Abdul Aziz City Science & Technology (KACST), P.O. Box 6086, Riyadh 11442, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
a)
Corresponding author: firdaushashim88@yahoo.com
b)
mustafa_albakri@unimap.edu.my
c)
ruzaidi@unimap.edu.my
d)
kamarudin@unimap.edu.my
e)
prof.binhussain@gmail.com

Abstract. This study investigated the use of a novel white clay geopolymer as a filler to produce high strength glass
reinforced epoxy pipe. It was found that using white clay geopolymer as filler gives better compressive strength to
the glass reinforced epoxy pipe. The disadvantages of current glass reinforced epoxy pipes such low compressive
strength which can be replaced by the composite pipes. Geopolymerization is an innovative technology that can
transform several aluminosilicate materials into useful products called geopolymers or inorganic polymers. A series
of glass reinforced epoxy pipe and glass reinforced epoxy pipe filled with 10 - 40 weight percentages white clay
geopolymer filler with 4 Molarity and 8 Molarity were prepared. Morphology of white clay geopolymer filler
surface was indicates using scanning electron microscopy. The additions of white clay geopolymer filler for both 4
Molarity and 8 Molarity show higher compressive strength than glass reinforced epoxy pipe without any
geopolymer filler. The compressive test of these epoxy geopolymer pipe samples was determined using Instron
Universal Testing under compression mode. Nonetheless, the compressive strength of glass reinforced epoxy pipe
with white clay geopolymer filler continues to drop when added to 40 wt% of the geopolymer filler loading for both
4 Molarity and 8 Molarity. These outcomes showed that the mixing of geopolymer materials in epoxy system can be
attained in this research.

INTRODUCTION
Recent years, glass reinforced epoxy (GRE) pipes become popular in oil and gas fields because it has many
advantages compared to metal pipes. Glass reinforced epoxy (GRE) composite pipes have an excessive physical
properties such high strength, easy to handle because lightweight, and minor threat of overflowing which making
them frequently ideal in the fields of aviation, structural engineering, and mostly in oil and gas industries [1].
Unluckily, these types of pipes have also their weaknesses, as for the first obstacle is that GRE’s was not
environmentally friendly because the chemical degeneration or aging process of the material as it cannot decompose
after uses it. The reaction of aging is normally a decrease in flexural strength and chemical deterioration (resin)
micro cracks and layer between the reinforcing fibers [2], [3], [4]. The aging results shows in casualty of strength,
through the thickness and makes the material exposed for failure. The next problem of the GRE pipes is it have only

Advanced Materials Engineering and Technology V

AIP Conf. Proc. 1835, 020042-1–020042-6; doi: 10.1063/1.4981864
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1505-8/$30.00

020042-1
limited inspection procedures and technique only [4], [5]. GRE pipes are generally constructed to withstand with
high force, lightweight, provides easy for handle and transportation, which results in reduced installation costs [6].
White clay geopolymer filler are use in this study to overwhelm this problem.

Over a decade performance in inorganic chemistry made through geopolymerization comprise mineral polymers
which termed as polysiatate or geopolymers that make a great prospect to produce composite materials not only with
excellent mechanical properties such as lightweight and high strength but also with ideal fire resistant, non-toxic
fumes and smokes, and resisting all organic solvents [7], [8], [9]. Generous researches give more effort on focusing
towards the development of inorganic geopolymers, due to the wide range of potential applications for these kinds
of materials. Literature on the synthesis, properties and applications of geopolymers can be found in several reports.
Various aluminosilicate materials can be transform into suitable products which is geopolymers or inorganic
polymers by using advance technology called geopolymerization technique [8], [9], [10]. Meanwhile clay materials
are obviously available and can afford to outstanding mechanical properties of either thermoplastic or thermosets
matrices, composite based clay materials were extensively studied [11-14].

In this research, white clay geopolymer filler was produced as shown in table 1. The optimum ratio of liquid to
liquid which is sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide ratio should be in range of 0.67 to 1.00 [15]. Formulation design
of geopolymer filler loading was referred to the composite system as stated from the previous researcher on
composite system which is use the loading of flax fibers varied from 0 to 60 wt% [16]. Epoxy resin DGEBA was
mixed with geopolymer filler which one of the tremendous existing interests in thermoset-based clay composites
since it considering inexpensive, easy to handle, great adhesion and bonding to many substrates, and excellent
chemical resistance for an extensive variety of applications [17]. White clay and kaolin are related with kaolinite
clay which one of most multipurpose industrial minerals that is mostly used as ceramic raw material, coating and
filler pigment for paper [18]. Consequently, these kinds of materials which fly ash, kaolin, and white clay has wide
potential to be used as a source elements to perform with liquid alkaline activator within sodium silicate solution
(Na2SiO3) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) mixture [19].

MATERIAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

Materials
The epoxy resin and hardener that have been used in this study which is Diglycidyl Ether of Bisphenol-A
(DGEBA) was supplied by Euro Pharma Sdn Bhd and hardener Isophorondiamine (IPDA) was supplied from Dr
Rahmatullah Holdings. White Clay raw materials were produced from Saudi local based material. Geopolymer paste
is made by alkaline activator solutions to activate the silicon and aluminum atoms in the material [20]. Alkaline
activator liquid used in this research is combination of 4 Molarity and 8 Molarity of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and
sodium silicate (Na2SiO3).

TABLE 1. Geopolymer Formulation Design

Ratio = 1 Total weight
Material Material (g) Alkaline Activator (g)
Na2SiO3 NaOH
Molarity
White Clay
500 250 250 4M
8M

Alkaline activator solution were prepared by mixing sodium hydroxide (4 M and 8 M) with sodium silicate liquid
before mixed with raw materials to increase the reactivity of solution. The ratio of solid to liquid which raw
materials to alkaline activator solutions and ratio of liquid to liquid which is sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide is
1. The geopolymer pastes then were cured in oven for 24 hours at 80 ˚C and then were taken out to be crushed by
using ring mill. Crushed geopolymer filler were sieved using sieve size of 150 μm.

020042-2
 Experimental procedure
The epoxy geopolymer resins were prepared due to the formulation in the table 2 by mechanical mixer using
blade stirrer. The mixing of epoxy geopolymer then was cured with hardener cycloaliphatic amine curing agent
IPDA. Epoxy and geopolymer materials filler were mixed for about 2 hours to make it completely homogeneous,
followed by curing agent/hardener for about 5 minutes. The epoxy geopolymer resin then was poured into the resin
tank after mixing with epoxy hardener.
Continuous glass fibers which is type-E glass fibers were impregnated with epoxy geopolymeric resin by means
of homemade “impregnation machine” as filament winding technique. The speed of the fibers impregnated with the
resin during the impregnation process was chosen based on the best penetration on geopolymer resin into the fibers.
The winding speed was controlled to generate the desired winding angle patterns. The feeding velocity of the fiber
into the resin tank will depends on the mandrel rotational speed. It was selected based on the best impregnation of
geopolymer resin into the fibers.
Filament winding samples were allowed to be cured at the mandrel in the room temperature for 24 hours after
the proper number of layers has been applied according to fully wounded. After the curing process completed, the
sample is ready for testing. In order to determine the mechanical properties, several tests are performed on
composite structures which are compressive test and elasticity modulus.

TABLE 2. Epoxy Geopolymer Formulation Design

Geopolymer Material (4 M) Epoxy + Hardener (%) Geopolymer (%)
100 0
White Clay 90 10
80 20
70 30
60 40

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Surface morphology of white clay raw material and white clay based-geopolymer
Figure 1 expresses the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of white clay geopolymer powder that
undergoes 24 hours of curing time in the oven at 80 ˚C and has been crushed into small particles using a milling
machine (ring mill). As can be seen, the changes on the surface morphological of white clay raw material (Fig.1 A)
and white clay based-geopolymer (Fig.1 B) recognized show changes due to the reactive dissolution of SiO 2 and
Al2O3 (contained in the cenospheres) in alkaline activator solution. This will leads to the development of alumino
silicate gel, which then acts as a precursor to geopolymer formation [21, 22]. The form of compacted structure
proved that the geopolymerization reaction occurred at almost all part of white clay particle.

A B

FIGURE 1. SEM micrographs of the A) raw materials white clay B) white clay based-geopolymer at 10000x and 5000x
magnification: compacted area (o)

020042-3
 Compression
The compression test involves of deforming a cylindrical hollow specimen to produce a thinner cylinder hollow
of huge diameter. Compression test of these samples were operated according to the ASTM D3410 using Instron
Universal Testing Machine. The compression test is a suitable method for defining stress strain reaction. The
compression test results for the whole sample shows in three major characterised which is compressive strength,
compressive strain, and modulus of elasticity due to the compression properties. Each compression properties show
the performance of the sample.

As can be seen in Figure 2 which is shows the characteristic curves from the compressive strength tests for glass
reinforced epoxy (GRE) pipe without any filler materials and glass reinforced epoxy (GRE) pipe filled with 10 wt%
- 40 wt% of white clay geopolymer filler with different molarity. It is obviously specified that GRE pipe with 30
wt% of white clay geopolymer filler of 8 M shows the highest compression strength compare to others
compositions. These compressive strength of the GRE pipe founded to be interesting when the compressive strength
of GRE pipe filled with geopolymer filler of white clay are marginally raised with the addition up to 10 wt% to 30
wt% of geopolymer materials for both molarity and it was braced by the rule of mixture theorem that the addition of
micro particles offer better rigidity than epoxy matrix 2[3].

On the other hand, more upsurge of geopolymer filler loading at 40 wt% of white clay resulted in a minor
reduction of about 2 % in strength; this due to slighter agglomerated and muddled nature of clay. From the graph
shows the optimum geopolymer filler loading is 30 wt% where it show the highest compressive strength for both 4
M and 8 M of NaOH concentration, which allow or manage to improvements in the interfacial bonding among the
filler and the matrix, thus increasing the surface area of matrix and filler interface. This indications to a decent stress
allocation from the matrix to the micro-filler, consequently resulting in enhanced compressive strength [4].

Compressive Strength
90.00
80.00
70.00
Strength (MPa)

60.00
50.00
Epoxy
40.00
30.00 4M
20.00 8M
10.00
0.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00
Geopolymer Content (%)

FIGURE 2. Compressive Strength of Epoxy Geopolymer 0 wt% - 40 wt%

Compressive modulus of elasticity materials in the static bending form is arranged in table 3. It is clearly shows
that the addition of geopolymer filler at 10 wt% for 4 M decreased the compressive strength of the GRE pipe but
tends to increase at 20 wt% and 30 wt% and slightly dropped the compressive strength at 40 wt% of geopolymer
filler. It is opposite with 8 M where compressive strength of GRE pipe shows increase from 10 wt% to 30 wt% of
geopolymer filler. The higher compressive strength discovered a robust contact interaction between polymer chains
(epoxy hardener) with the white clay based-geopolymer filler. Nonetheless, the reducing of compressive strength in
higher contain of white clay at 40 wt% may governing the ability and volume of displacing load and plastic
deformation amongst particles and matrix interface.

020042-4
 TABLE 3. Compression Properties of Epoxy Hardener and Epoxy Geopolymer

Compressive Strength (MPa) Compressive Strain (%) Modulus Elasticity (MPa)

10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40
Epoxy 53.36 0.04 1681.28
4M 52.40 53.86 59.35 58.75 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 1008.82 1290.72 1240.95 1236.88
8M 60.79 74.38 74.49 65.09 13.18 30.05 23.58 0.06 1909.82 2022.70 2404.95 1588.57

CONCLUSION

In summary, it can be concluded that geopolymer materials can act as filler in the piping system application thus
can improve some of the physical properties of the existing glass reinforced epoxy (GRE) pipe. GRE pipe filled with
white clay based-geopolymer filler was developed on epoxy resin with different weight percentage and different
molarity of sodium hydroxide. From the experimental result, GRE pipe with geopolymer 8 M filler of 30 wt%
loading shows the highest strength compare to the others compositions while GRE pipe with 10 wt% of geopolymer
filler loading of 4 M show the lowest strength even compare with GRE without any geopolymer filler. Outstanding
to the good mechanical properties of the waste materials based geopolymer has larger possible to be a matrix filler
of composite with glass fiber in the making of piping system and application.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to extend our appreciation to the Center of Excellence Geopolymer & Green Technology
(CEGeoGTech), King Abdul Aziz Science and Technology (KACST) and all the people who helped to ensure that
the successful completion of this study.

REFERENCES

1. H. Faria and R.M. Guedes, Polym. Test. 29, 337-345 (2010).

2. E. Knox, M. Cowling, and S. Hashim, Int. J. Fatigue. 22, 513-519 (2000).
3. H. Hahn, Fatigue & Creep Compos. Mater. 19-35 (1982).
4. A. Gibson, Met. Mater. 5, 590-594 (1989).
5. Z. Salibi, Desalination. 138, 379-384 (2001).
6. A. Gibson and D. Spagni. The Institute of Marine Engineers (UK) 3-9 (1991).
7. J. DAVIDOVITS, França: Institut Géopolymère (2008).
8. J. Davidovits, Proceedings of 2005 geopolymer conference (2005).
9. L. Sheppar, Proceedings of the 105th. (2009).
10. P. De Silva, K. Sagoe-Crenstil and V. Sirivivatnanon, Cem. Concr. Res. 37, 512-518 (2007).
11. M. Alexandre and P. Dubois, Mater. Sci. Eng.: R: Reports. 28, 1-63 (2000).
12. R.A Vaia, B.B. Sauer, O.K. Tse and E.P. Giannelis, J. Polym. Sci. Part B: Polymer Physics. 35, 59-67
(1997).
13. P. B. Messersmith and E.P. Giannelis, Chem. Mater. 6, 1719-1725 (1994).
14. N. F. Shahedan, M.M.A.B. Abdullah, K. Hussin, I. Sandu, C.M.R. Ghazali, M. Binhussain and Z.Y.A.V.
SANDU, Technol. 3, 9 (2014).
15. P. Chindaprasirt, T. Chareerat and V. Sirivivatnanon, Cem. Concr. Compos. 29, 224-229 (2007).
16. A. Arbelaiz, B. Fernandez, J. Ramos, A. Retegi, R. Llano-Ponte and I. Mondragon, Compos. Sci. Technol.
65, 1582-1592 (2005).
17. U. Rattanasak and P. Chindaprasirt, Miner. Eng. 22, 1073-1078 (2009).
18. M. Wang, D. Jia, P. He and Y. Zhou, Mater. Lett. 64, 2551-2554 (2010).
19. J. Temuujin, A. van Riessen and K. MacKenzie, Constr. Build. Mater. 24, 1906-1910 (2010).
20. D. Tran, D. Kroisová, P. Louda, O. Bortnovsky and P. Bezucha, Manuf. Eng. 37, 492-497 (2009).
21. A. Mustafa Al Bakri, H. Kamarudin, M. Bnhussain, I. Khairul Nizar, A. Rafiza and A. Izzat. Aust J Basic
App Sci. 5, 1199-1203 (2011).
22. S. M. Nyale, O.O. Babajide, G.D. Birch, N. Böke and L.F. Petrik, Procedia Enviro. Sci. 18, 722-730 (2013).

020042-5
23. B. Nuhiji, D. Attard, G. Thorogood, T. Hanley, K. Magniez, J. Bungur and B. Fox. Mater. 6, 3624-3640
(2013).
24. H. Alamri and I.M. Low, Mater. Des. 42, 214-222 (2012).

020042-6