Abstract
The production of Portland cement (PC) is a major contributor to global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Addressing these environmental concerns necessitates the exploration of alternative cement. Consequently, geopolymer cement concrete (GPC) has emerged as a promising candidate due to its reduced carbon footprint and performance comparable to PC. This comprehensive review delves into the advancements and practical applications of geopolymer concretes, with a primary focus on evaluating the physical, fresh, mechanical, and durability properties of GPC. Additionally, this review addresses the chemistry and structure of geopolymers, their reaction mechanisms, and the basic components employed in their manufacturing processes. Collective findings from all the reviewed papers consistently reveal that GPC exhibits excellent mechanical strength, on par with PC, yet with significantly reduced CO2 release during production. Furthermore, GPCs showcase similar or improved physical characteristics, indicating their potential for diverse construction applications. Notably, these findings underscore the favorable durability properties of GPC, suggesting its suitability for long-term performance in challenging environments. This review consolidates recent significant progress in geopolymer technology, emphasizing its potential as a sustainable alternative to PC. An in-depth analysis is provided regarding the physical, fresh, mechanical, and durability properties of GPC, including a nuanced examination of the strengths and weaknesses of each property. Notably, the advancements in chemistry and manufacturing techniques have positioned GPC as a viable alternative to traditional PC. Finally, this study recommends prospective current and future applications while recognizing earlier successful uses of geopolymers that have been effectively developed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdel-Gawwad HA, Abo-El-Enein SA (2016) A novel method to produce dry geopolymer cement powder. HBRC J 12:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.008
Adam AA (2019) The effects of water to solid ratio, activator to binder ratio, and lime proportion on the compressive strength of ambient-cured geopolymer concrete. J Civ Eng Forum 5:161–168
Ahdaya M, Imqam A (2019) Investigating geopolymer cement performance in presence of water based drilling fluid. J Pet Sci Eng 176:934–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.02.010
Alanazi H, Yang M, Zhang D, Gao Z (2017) Early strength and durability of metakaolin-based geopolymer concrete. Mag Concr Res 69:46–54. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.16.00118
Albidah A, Abadel A, Alrshoudi F, Altheeb A, Abbas H, Al-Salloum Y (2020) Bond strength between concrete substrate and metakaolin geopolymer repair mortars at ambient and elevated temperatures. J Mater Res Technol 9:10732–10745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.07.092
Allahverdi A, Vafaei M, Maghsoodloorad H (2017) Quality control and assessment of geopolymer cements based on reacted and free alkalis. Constr Build Mater 153:274–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.073
Almutairi AL, Tayeh BA, Adesina A, Isleem HF, Zeyad AM (2021) Potential applications of geopolymer concrete in construction: a review. Case Stud Constr Mater 15:e00733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00733
Alomayri T, Assaedi H, Shaikh FUA, Low IM (2014) Effect of water absorption on the mechanical properties of cotton fabric-reinforced geopolymer composites. J Asian Ceram Soc 2:223–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jascer.2014.05.005
Ambroise J, Martin-Calle S, Pera J (1992) Pozzolanic behavior of thermally activated kaolin. Spec Publ 132:731–748
Amran YHM, Alyousef R, Alabduljabbar H, El-Zeadani M (2020) Clean production and properties of geopolymer concrete; A review. J Clean Prod 251:119679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119679
Assi LN, Carter K, Deaver E, Ziehl P (2020) Review of availability of source materials for geopolymer/sustainable concrete. J Clean Prod 263:121477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121477
Autef A, Joussein E, Gasgnier G, Pronier S, Sobrados I, Sanz J, Rossignol S (2013) Role of metakaolin dehydroxylation in geopolymer synthesis. Powder Technol 250:33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2013.09.022
Awoyera PO, Adesina A, Sivakrishna A, Gobinath R, Kumar KR, Srinivas A (2020) Alkali activated binders: challenges and opportunities. Mater Today Proc 27:40–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.08.199
Balczár I, Korim T, Dobrádi A (2015) Correlation of strength to apparent porosity of geopolymers–understanding through variations of setting time. Constr Build Mater 93:983–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.059
Bansal BK, Chouhan DS, Gupta T, Sharma RK (2017) Behaviour of concrete utilizing metakaoline: a review. Eur J Adv Eng Technol 4:549–554
Bayuaji R, Yasin AK, Susanto TE, Darmawan MS (2017) A review in geopolymer binder with dry mixing method (geopolymer cement). AIP Conf Proc 1887:020022. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5003505
Chen K, Wu D, Xia L, Cai Q, Zhang Z (2021) Geopolymer concrete durability subjected to aggressive environments: a review of influence factors and comparison with ordinary portland cement. Constr Build Mater 279:122496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122496
Cho BS, Lee HH, Choi YC (2017) Effects of aluminate rich slag on compressive strength, drying shrinkage and microstructure of blast furnace slag cement. Constr Build Mater 140:293–300
da Silva Rocha T, Dias DP, França FCC, de Salles Guerra RR, de Oliveira LRDC (2018) Metakaolin-based geopolymer mortars with different alkaline activators (Na+ and K+). Constr Build Mater 178:453–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.172
Dal Pozzo A, Carabba L, Bignozzi MC, Tugnoli A (2019) Life cycle assessment of a geopolymer mixture for fireproofing applications. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:1743–1757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01603-z
Duan P, Yan C, Zhou W (2017) Compressive strength and microstructure of fly ash based geopolymer blended with silica fume under thermal cycle. Cem Concr Compos 78:108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.01.009
Esparham A, Ghalatian F (2022) The features of geopolymer concrete as a novel approach for utilization in green urban structures. J Compos Compd 4:89–96. https://doi.org/10.52547/jcc.4.2.4
Gao X, Yu QL, Brouwers HJH (2016) Assessing the porosity and shrinkage of alkali activated slag-fly ash composites designed applying a packing model. Constr Build Mater 119:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.026
Habert G, d’Espinose de Lacaillerie JB, Roussel N (2011) An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete production: reviewing current research trends. J Clean Prod 19:1229–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.03.012
Hassan A, Arif M, Shariq M (2019) Use of geopolymer concrete for a cleaner and sustainable environment: a review of mechanical properties and microstructure. J Clean Prod 223:704–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.051
Imbabi MS, Carrigan C, McKenna S (2012) Trends and developments in green cement and concrete technology. Int J Sustain Built Environ 1:194–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2013.05.001
Imtiaz L, Rehman SK, Ali Memon S, Khizar Khan M, Faisal Javed M (2020) A review of recent developments and advances in eco-friendly geopolymer concrete. Appl Sci 10(21):7838
Jaya NA, Yun-Ming L, Abdullah MMAB, Cheng-Yong H, Hussin K (2018). Effect of sodium hydroxide molarity on physical, mechanical and thermal conductivity of metakaolin geopolymers. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. IOP Publishing, p 012015
Juenger MCG, Winnefeld F, Provis JL, Ideker JH (2011) Advances in alternative cementitious binders. Cem Concr Res 41:1232–1243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2010.11.012
Khalil WI, Frayyeh QJ, Abed HT (2019) Properties of metakaolin based pervious geopolymer concrete. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. IOP Publishing, p 022056
Ma C-K, Awang AZ, Omar W (2018) Structural and material performance of geopolymer concrete: a review. Constr Build Mater 186:90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.07.111
Mehta A, Siddique R (2017) Sulfuric acid resistance of fly ash based geopolymer concrete. Constr Build Mater 146:136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.077
Meshram RB, Kumar S (2022) Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of geopolymer cement manufacturing with Portland cement in Indian context. Int J Environ Sci Technol 19:4791–4802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03336-9
Mohamed OA (2022) Effect of immersing geopolymer slag-fly ash mortar in sulfuric acid on strength development and stability of mass. Constr Build Mater 341:127786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127786
Mohd Tahir MF, Abdullah MMAB, Abd Rahim SZ, Mohd Hasan MR, Saafi M, Putra Jaya R, Mohamed R (2022) Potential of industrial by-products based geopolymer for rigid concrete pavement application. Constr Build Mater 344:128190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128190
Mohseni E (2018) Assessment of Na2SiO3 to NaOH ratio impact on the performance of polypropylene fiber-reinforced geopolymer composites. Constr Build Mater 186:904–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.08.032
Morsy MS, Alsayed SH, Al-Salloum Y, Almusallam T (2014) Effect of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide ratios on strength and microstructure of fly ash geopolymer binder. Arab J Sci Eng 39:4333–4339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-014-1093-8
Moseson AJ, Moseson DE, Barsoum MW (2012) High volume limestone alkali-activated cement developed by design of experiment. Cem Concr Compos 34:328–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2011.11.004
Neupane K, Chalmers D, Kidd P (2018) High-strength geopolymer concrete-properties, advantages and challenges. Adv Mater 7:15–25. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.am.20180702.11
Nuaklong P, Sata V, Chindaprasirt P (2018) Properties of metakaolin-high calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete containing recycled aggregate from crushed concrete specimens. Constr Build Mater 161:365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.152
Okoye FN (2017) Geopolymer binder: a veritable alternative to portland cement. Mater Today Proc 4:5599–5604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.06.017
Paiva MDM, Silva ECCM, Melo DMA, Martinelli AE, Schneider JF (2018) A geopolymer cementing system for oil wells subject to steam injection. J Pet Sci Eng 169:748–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.06.022
Panchmatia P, Olvera R, Genedy M, Juenger MCG, van Oort E (2020) Shrinkage behavior of portland and geopolymer cements at elevated temperature and pressure. J Pet Sci Eng 195:107884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2020.107884
Petrus HTBM, Fairuz FI, Sa’dan N, Olvianas M, Astuti W, Jenie SNA, Setiawan FA, Anggara F, Ekaputri JJ, Bendiyasa IM (2021) Green geopolymer cement with dry activator from geothermal sludge and sodium hydroxide. J Clean Prod 293:126143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126143
Poloju KK, Srinivasu K, Rao M (2020) Study on mechanical characterization of geopolymer cement mortar with single solution and combined solution. J xi’an Univ Archit Technol XII:481–487
Provis JL (2018) Alkali-activated materials. Cem Concr Res 114:40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.009
Rahmawati C, Aprilia S, Saidi T, Aulia TB (2021a) Current development of geopolymer cement with nanosilica and cellulose nanocrystals. In: Journal of physics: conference series. IOP Publishing, p 012056
Rahmawati C, Aprilia S, Saidi T, Aulia TB, Hadi AE (2021b) The effects of nanosilica on mechanical properties and fracture toughness of geopolymer cement. Polymers 13(13):2178
Ramujee K, PothaRaju M (2017) Mechanical properties of geopolymer concrete composites. Mater Today Proc 4:2937–2945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.02.175
Rashad AM (2013) Metakaolin as cementitious material: history, scours, production and composition—a comprehensive overview. Constr Build Mater 41:303–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.12.001
Reddy NAK, Ramujee K (2022) Comparative study on mechanical properties of fly ash & GGBFS based geopolymer concrete and OPC concrete using nano-alumina. Mater Today Proc 60:399–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.01.260
Ruan S, Chen S, Zhu X, Zeng Q, Liu Y, Lai J, Yan D (2021) Matrix wettability and mechanical properties of geopolymer cement-polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) hybrids. Cem Concr Compos 124:104268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104268
Sathonsaowaphak A, Chindaprasirt P, Pimraksa K (2009) Workability and strength of lignite bottom ash geopolymer mortar. J Hazard Mater 168:44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.01.120
Shilar FA, Ganachari SV, Patil VB (2022) Investigation of the effect of granite waste powder as a binder for different molarity of geopolymer concrete on fresh and mechanical properties. Mater Lett 309:131302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2021.131302
Singh NB (2018) Fly ash-based geopolymer binder: a future construction material. Minerals 8(7):299
Singh NB, Middendorf B (2020) Geopolymers as an alternative to portland cement: An overview. Constr Build Mater 237:117455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117455
Singh NB, Saxena SK, Kumar M, Rai S (2019) Geopolymer cement: synthesis, characterization, properties and applications. Mater Today Proc 15:364–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.04.095
Singh NB, Kumar M, Rai S (2020) Geopolymer cement and concrete: properties. Mater Today Proc 29:743–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.513
Snell C, Tempest B, Gentry T (2017) Comparison of the thermal characteristics of Portland cement and geopolymer cement concrete mixes. J Archit Eng 23:04017002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000240
Song Q, Guo M-Z, Ling T-C (2022) A review of elevated-temperature properties of alternative binders: supplementary cementitious materials and alkali-activated materials. Constr Build Mater 341:127894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127894
Tennakoon C, Shayan A, Sanjayan JG, Xu A (2017) Chloride ingress and steel corrosion in geopolymer concrete based on long term tests. Mater Des 116:287–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.12.030
Turner LK, Collins FG (2013) Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: a comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Constr Build Mater 43:125–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.023
Uysal M, Al-mashhadani MM, Aygörmez Y, Canpolat O (2018) Effect of using colemanite waste and silica fume as partial replacement on the performance of metakaolin-based geopolymer mortars. Constr Build Mater 176:271–282
Van Jaarsveld JGS, Van Deventer JSJ, Lorenzen L (1997) The potential use of geopolymeric materials to immobilise toxic metals: part I. Theory and applications. Miner Eng 10:659–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-6875(97)00046-0
van Jaarsveld JGS, van Deventer JSJ, Lukey GC (2003) The characterisation of source materials in fly ash-based geopolymers. Mater Lett 57:1272–1280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-577X(02)00971-0
Weng T-L, Lin W-T, Cheng A (2013) Effect of metakaolin on strength and efflorescence quantity of cement-based composites. Sci World J 2013(1):606524
Xu H, Van Deventer JSJ (2000) The geopolymerisation of alumino-silicate minerals. Int J Miner Process 59:247–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-7516(99)00074-5
Yuan J, Li L, He P, Chen Z, Lao C, Jia D, Zhou Y (2021) Effects of kinds of alkali-activated ions on geopolymerization process of geopolymer cement pastes. Constr Build Mater 293:123536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123536
Zelić J, Rušić D, Veža D, Krstulović R (2000) The role of silica fume in the kinetics and mechanisms during the early stage of cement hydration. Cem Concr Res 30:1655–1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00374-4
Zhang J, Shi C, Zhang Z, Ou Z (2017) Durability of alkali-activated materials in aggressive environments: a review on recent studies. Constr Build Mater 152:598–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.027
Zhang P, Zheng Y, Wang K, Zhang J (2018) A review on properties of fresh and hardened geopolymer mortar. Compos Part B Eng 152:79–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.06.031
Acknowledgements
The authors express their gratitude to the Interdisciplinary Research Center for Construction and Building Mateials (IRC-CBM), KFUPM, Saudi Arabia, for supporting this work under G. No. INCB2306. Additionally, the authors also extend their appreciation to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering for their support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Odeh, A., Al-Fakih, A., Alghannam, M. et al. Recent Progress in Geopolymer Concrete Technology: A Review. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Civ Eng (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-024-01391-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-024-01391-z