Rice Husk Ash Derived Sodium Silicate Using Hydrothermal and Convection Heating Methods

  • Tze Jhin Tsen
  • Daniel KongEmail author
  • Ehsan Zeimaran
  • Marios Soutsos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 53)


Geopolymers produced by using waste materials are more cost-effective and environmentally friendly. Commercial sodium silicate (sodium water glass) is currently being produced by direct fusion of pure silica sand and soda ash (Na2CO3) in oil, gas or electrically-fired furnaces at high temperatures (~1300 °C)—a production process that is energy intensive and which generates CO2. One method of minimizing these environmental issues is to use supplementary sources of silica, such as rice husk ash (RHA), to produce sodium silicate at lower temperatures. Therefore, this project aims to compare the effect of sodium silicate solution made of rice husk ash sieved at various particle sizes (un-sieved, <45 μm, <300 μm) using two techniques of (a) hydrothermal and (b) convection heating on fly ash-based geopolymer mortars. The geopolymers synthesized using ‘in-house’ sodium silicates were then compared with those made using commercial sodium silicate. Physicochemical properties of raw RHA and synthesized sodium silicates were characterized using the Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (EDXRF), X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRD), Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FESEM), Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX), and Inductively-Coupled Plasma (ICP). When using the convection heating method, finer particle sizes resulted in a higher conversion rate, while finer RHA resulted in the precipitation of crystalline silica during the hydrothermal process. Geopolymer mortars cured at a temperature of 70 °C were tested for compressive strength at 1, 7 and 28 days. At lower alkali dosages, the mortar strengths made out of both in-house and commercial sodium silicates had comparable strengths, while at higher alkali dosages the mortars prepared from commercial sodium silicates demonstrated significantly higher strengths.


Rice husk ash Sodium silicate Hydrothermal method Convection heating method Geopolymer mortar 



This research is supported through the Newton Ungku-Omar Coordination Fund, jointly funded by Innovate UK and the Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology under the project title of “Low Carbon Footprint Precast Concrete (LowCoPreCon)”.


  1. 1.
    Abdul Rahim R, Rahmiati T, Azizli KA, Man Z, Nuruddin MF, Ismail L (2015) Comparison of using NaOH and KOH activated fly ash-based geopolymer on the mechanical properties. Paper presented at the Materials Science ForumGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arbi, K., Nedeljković, M., Zuo, Y., and Ye, G. (2016). A review on the durability of alkali-activated fly ash/slag systems: advances, issues, and perspectives. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 55(19), 5439–5453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bana P, Greiner I (2016) Comparison of conventional and microwave heating for evaluation of microwave effects. Aust J Chem 69(8):865–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duxson P, Lukey GC, van Deventer JS (2007) Physical evolution of Na-geopolymer derived from metakaolin up to 1000 C. J Mater Sci 42(9):3044–3054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feng Q, Chen K, Ma D, Lin H, Liu Z, Qin S, Luo Y (2018) Synthesis of high specific surface area silica aerogel from rice husk ash via ambient pressure drying. Colloids Surf, A 539:399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foletto EL, Gratieri E, Oliveira LH, Jahn SL (2006) Conversion of rice hull ash into soluble sodium silicate. Mater Res 9(3):335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibrahim DM, El-Hemaly SA, Abdel-Kerim FM (1980) Study of rice-husk ash silica by infrared spectroscopy. Thermochim Acta 37(3):307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ismail I, Bernal SA, Provis JL, San Nicolas R, Brice DG, Kilcullen AR, Van Deventer JS (2013) Influence of fly ash on the water and chloride permeability of alkali-activated slag mortars and concretes. Constr Build Mater 48:1187–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Juenger MCG, Winnefeld F, Provis JL, Ideker JH (2011) Advances in alternative cementitious bindersGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kalapathy U, Proctor A, Shultz J (2000) Production and properties of flexible sodium silicate films from rice hull ash silica. Biores Technol 72(2):99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kalapathy U, Proctor A, Shultz J (2000) A simple method for production of pure silica from rice hull ash. Bioresour TechnolGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kamseu E, à Moungam LB, Cannio M, Billong N, Chaysuwan D, Melo UC, Leonelli C (2017) Substitution of sodium silicate with rice husk ash-NaOH solution in metakaolin based geopolymer cement concerning reduction in global warming. J Clean Prod 142:3050–3060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kongmanklang C, Rangsriwatananon K (2015) Hydrothermal synthesis of high crystalline silicalite from rice husk ash. J SpectroscGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lisovskyy I, Litovchenko V, Mazunov D, Kaschieva S, Koprinarova J, Dmitriev S (2005) Infrared spectroscopy study of Si-SiO2 structures irradiated with high-energy electrons. J Optoelectron Adv Mater 7(1):325–328Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Owoeye S (2017) Effects of extraction temperature and time on the physical properties of soluble sodium silicate from rice husk ash. Sci J ChemGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahier H, Simons W, Van Mele B, Biesemans M (1997) Low-temperature synthesized aluminosilicate glasses: part III influence of the composition of the silicate solution on production, structure and properties. J Mater Sci 32(9):2237–2247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roschat W, Siritanon T, Yoosuk B, Promarak V (2016) Rice husk-derived sodium silicate as a highly efficient and low-cost basic heterogeneous catalyst for biodiesel production. Energy Convers Manag 119:453–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rungrodnimitchai S, Phokhanusai W, Sungkhaho N (2017) Preparation of silica gel from rice husk ash using microwave heating. J Metals, Mater Min 19(2)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sharma NK, Williams WS, Zangvil A (1984) Formation and structure of silicon carbide whiskers from rice hulls. J Am Ceram SocGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Soutsos M, Boyle AP, Vinai R, Hadjierakleous A, Barnett SJ (2016) Factors influencing the compressive strength of fly ash based geopolymers. Constr Build Mater 110:355–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Turner LK, Collins FG (2013) Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: a comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Constr Build MaterGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xingcai W (1996) Studies on the hydrothermal conditions of the extraction of high-purity silica from rice husks. Bull Chin Ceram Soc, vol 4Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xu H (2000) The geopolymerisation of alumino-silicate minerals. Int J Min Process 59:247–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tze Jhin Tsen
    • 1
  • Daniel Kong
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ehsan Zeimaran
    • 1
  • Marios Soutsos
    • 2
  1. 1.School of EngineeringMonash UniversityBandar SunwayMalaysia
  2. 2.School of Natural and Built EnvironmentQueen’s University BelfastBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations