Chen 2021

Construction and Building Materials 279 (2021) 122496
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
Geopolymer concrete durability subjected to aggressive environments –

A review of influence factors and comparison with ordinary Portland
cement
Keyu Chen, Dazhi Wu ⇑, Linling Xia, Qimao Cai, Zhenying Zhang
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 300018, China
h i g h l i g h t s
Carbonation, acid, sulfate, heat, and chloride resistance are systematic reviewed.
Durability of geopolymer concrete is compared to OPC concrete.
The influence factors and mechanism of durability are highlighted.
The future challenges and opportunities in durability are innovatively expounded.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Although ordinary Portland cement (OPC) is the main raw material of concrete, its production pollutes
Received 21 August 2020 the atmosphere and wastes a large amount of energy, which does not meet the demands of the green
Received in revised form 20 December 2020 building industry development. Geopolymers have received considerable attention and expected to
Accepted 22 January 2021
become a substitute for OPC. However, the geopolymer concrete has limited literature of durability sub-
Available online 5 February 2021
jected to aggressive environments, and which is the basis for the prediction of long-term performance
and broader engineering applications. This paper reviews the recent researches on geopolymer concrete
Keywords:
exposed to carbonation, acid corrosion, sulfate solution, heat temperature, and chloride penetration com-
Geopolymer
Ordinary Portland cement
parison with OPC concrete. In many cases, the durability of geopolymer concrete is better than OPC con-
Durability crete, and calcium content has a great effect on the durability mechanism. The influence factors and
Damage mechanism interactions of durability of geopolymer concrete have been highlight. Finally, a few potential opportuni-
Influencing factors ties and noteworthy challenges have been suggested for future studies on durability during life-cycle
periods.
Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction However, the larger uses of OPC are becoming global threats to
the living organism these days. A large amount of natural resources
With the rapid development of the economy, a large amount of is consumed in OPC production, the thermal and electrical energy
infrastructure and construction projects have been carried out on a was consumed more than 2.72 GJ/ton and 65 kWh/ton, respec-
world scale, which put forward higher requirements for the effi- tively [4,5]. The production and use of OPC are also the primary
ciency, performance, and sustainability of construction industry anthropogenic driver of climate change, accounting for around
technology. Concrete is the most utilized construction material, 8% of global carbon dioxides [6,7]. Statistical trends estimate that
which is the second material the most consumed after water [1]. global OPC production exceeded 6 billion tons by the middle of this
According to statistics, the per capita production of concrete is century [8]. In China, approximately 0.73 and 23.5 billion tons of
approximately one cubic meter [2]. Ordinary Portland cement OPC was produced in 2002 and 2019, thus exhibiting a rapid
(OPC) is the main raw material of concrete, with products that have annual increase these years [9,10]. Over-reliance on OPC con-
the advantages of high strength, low drying shrinkage, etc. [3]. tributes to air pollution and haze in China, around 53.4% of cities
don’t pass the national ambient air quality standards in 2019
⇑ Corresponding author. [11]. There is an urgent need to develop an environmentally sus-
E-mail address: wudz@zstu.edu.cn (D. Wu). tainable building material due to these situations.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122496
0950-0618/Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Chen, D. Wu, L. Xia et al. Construction and Building Materials 279 (2021) 122496
The concept of geopolymers was first proposed by Davidovits in The two types of gels could coexist in alkali-activated blended sys-
1978 [12]. They are the sustainable materials resulting from the tems, and the main activation product could change from N-A-S-H
reaction of industrial by-products (generally fly ash, slag, metakao- to C-S-H gel with the increase of CaO content [27].
lin, palm oil fuel ash, rice husk ash, etc.) with alkaline solutions (al- Numerous studies are dedicated to optimize the mechanical
kali hydroxide solutions and soluble silicates) in the room or high- properties of geopolymer products and to understand the mecha-
temperature environment [13,14]. Aluminosilicate minerals were nism of geopolymerization. Reddy et al. [28] reported that the
dissolved in solutions and then free SiO4 and AlO4 tetrahedral units oxide composition of precursors has a distinctive effect on the
were reacted by sharing oxygen atoms. Finally, the polymeric Si– strength. Shi et al. [24] linked structural characterization and rhe-
O–Al–O bonds which are similar to amorphous feldspar were ological properties, and highlighted the importance of raw materi-
formed [15]. Actually, the geopolymerization is influenced by the als in assessing the sustainability. Zhang et al. [14] and Nurruddin
ability of aluminum ions to induce crystal structure and chemical et al. [29] claimed that the different curing methods of geopolymer
reaction of SiO2 skeleton [16]. Previous studies show that geopoly- concrete and oven proofed to be the most efficient. Al-mashhadani
mer concrete (GPC) has excellent mechanical properties, high et al. [17] mixed three types of fibers into fly ash–steel slag based
durability, low shrinkage, and material cost; approximately 10– geopolymer, they found that incorporation of fiber can improve the
30% lower than OPC concrete to chemical attacks fascinated the mechanical properties at the late age. Xie et al. [18], Elahi et al.
scientific community [17,18]. On the other hand, water mainly acts [30], and Li et al. [31] provided comprehensive reviews on the
as the reaction medium in the geopolymerization reaction and pro- composition of different types of pozzolans, and they concluded
motes the dissolution of aluminosilicate, which reduces the waster fresh properties can be tailored with a specific mixture. Li et al.
requirement [19]. Abbas et al. [20] pointed out that the geopoly- [31] also classified mixture design methods into three categories,
mer concrete achieved a reduction in global warming potential including target strength, performance-based, and statistical facto-
by 61% and improved the human health category by 9.4%. Thus, rial model methods.
geopolymer concrete is considered the better alternatives for OPC Overall, the interdependence of factors influencing geopolymer-
concrete across some range of applications due to the high world- ization reaction can be described as a tetrahedral model (Fig. 2),
wide availability of aluminosilicate materials and excellent techni- analogous to the structure of crystalline silica. The material prop-
cal properties (i.e. workability and mechanical properties), erties, mixture, and preparation regime represent the base of the
enabling engineering processing using the trained concrete work- tetrahedral. Besides, the hardened and fresh properties are placed
ers [21]. at the top and internal of the model, respectively. The model can
Although the utilization of industrial waste and reduction of help to understand the influence factors and optimize the design
carbon dioxides is very much essential, the geopolymer has to look of geopolymer concrete.
into the hardened properties requirements in terms of quality The investigation of durability of concrete by employing poz-
specified for OPC concrete. With this in mind, the durability of con- zolans is one of vital issues and current urgent demand. The OPC
crete subjected to aggressive environments has become a crucial concrete structures already built in the past are going through an
issue for field applications due to the increasing demand for the inevitable disintegration stage [32]. It is found that the durability
maintenance-free and long service life of concrete structures, of OPC concrete to various corrosive environments is poor. The cost
which is also one of the most momentous properties within of corrosion worldwide was $2.5 trillion in 2015, or more than 3%
geopolymer commercialization [22,23]. However, many studies of gross domestic product for that year [33]. Corrosion of rein-
have directed towards the change of mechanical properties in the forced concrete structures in the United States accounts for 50%
individual erosion condition and the durability of geopolymer con- (almost $28 billion) of the annual loss [34]. About 89% of bridges
crete has not been systematically addressed. This article will, serviced for 7–25 years in Chinese coastal areas have corrosion of
therefore, present a brief discussion of the durability mechanism steel bars. Different concretes require different levels of durability,
of geopolymer concrete, especially in comparison with OPC, depending on the exposure environment and desired properties.
including the carbonation resistance, acid corrosion resistance, sul- Chemical erosion of cementitious materials is a complicated pro-
fate carbonation resistance, heat resistance, and chloride resis- cess. The deterioration of geopolymer concrete is caused by the
tance. Then, the technological factors that influence durability of change in the composition and structure of the materials. Fig. 3
geopolymer concrete are discussed. The recommendations regard- shows the general damage mechanism of cement/geopolymer con-
ing the improvement the durability are also reported in this paper crete. The specimens are exposed to the corrosive environment and
for expanding the scope of acceptability of geopolymer concrete. paste will dissolve and damage. Then the concrete structures break
down, which promotes depassivation and corrosion of the steel bar
2. Gel chemistry and durability mechanism of geopolymer and, finally, leads to cracking and spalling of concrete [35].
concrete The durability of geopolymer concrete refers to the ability to
maintain properties for its service period of exposure to aggressive
The selection of aluminosilicate precursors available for employ environments which related to the safety of construction engineer-
in geopolymerization reaction has broadened significantly ing. Bernal et al. [25] reviewed the results obtained when geopoly-
recently, with particular emphasis being placed upon the use of mer binders under different aggressive environments and they
materials for which there is not conflict in demand from utilization pointed out that a deeper understanding of the durability mecha-
in blends with OPC [24]. However, different types of precursors nisms still needs to be developed based on the different influence
have very different chemical makeup and rection mechanisms, as factors. Xie et al. [18] suggested that the durability of geopolymer
shown in Fig. 1. Generally, the geopolymer can be divided into concrete governed by a set of factors, and need further research in
main categories according to the calcium content of the system, both laboratory and field study. Table 1 also describes some of the
and. The reaction products of low-calcium systems (such as recent investigations as well as aluminosilicate precursors, alkali
alkali-activated Class-F fly ash, metakaolin, POFA, etc.) are mostly activator solution of the studies.
N-A-S-H gels with highly crosslinked (mainly Q4) and zeolite-like In summary, the studies on the durability of geopolymers are
structure, however, those of high-calcium systems (such as mainly focused on carbonation resistance, acid corrosion resis-
alkali-activated Class-C fly ash, slag, etc.) are C-S-H gels with tance, sulfate resistance, heat resistance, and chloride resistance.
tobermorite-like (mostly Q2, some Q1 and Q3) structure [25,26]. Table 2 shows a comparison of the general erosion mechanism
2
Fig. 1. SiO2-Al2O3 + Fe2O3-CaO ternary diagram of aluminosilicate precursors.
Fig. 2. Interdependence of factors influencing geopolymerization reaction under normal conditions.
Fig. 3. The general damage mechanism of cement/geopolymer concrete.
3
Table 1 film of steel bar, and lead to eventual failure of structures due to
. Some recent researches on durability of geopolymer concrete. the internal expansion stress [49]. Generally, carbonation is a rela-
Ref. Precursors Activator Durability properties tively slow process exposed to nature due to a lack of CO2 concen-
Bondar et al. [36] NP KOH + Na2SiO3 Sulfate resistance tration and water content. Therefore, the accelerated carbonization
Bernal et al. [37] FA + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 Carbonation tests are usually carried out under the condition of sufficient mois-
resistance ture in laboratory. Although the introduction of industrial sources
Ariffin et al. [38] FA + POFA NaOH + Na2SiO3 Acid corrosion carbon dioxide in OPC hydration process can significantly increase
resistance
El-Sayed et al. GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 Sulfate resistance
strength and improve salt permeability resistance, short-term car-
[39] bon dioxide treatment processes are not considered in this paper
Fernandez- FA Na2SiO3 Heat resistance [50]. Only the influence of carbonation on the durability of binder
Jimenez et al. materials is considered. The carbonization mechanism of geopoly-
[40]
mer concrete is quite different from that of OPC. For the carbona-
Bernal et al. [41] MK + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 Chloride resistance
Prabu et al. [42] FA + RHA NaOH, KOH, Acid and sulfate tion process of high-calcium systems, alkalis in the pore react
K2SiO3 + Na2SiO3 resistance with external carbon dioxide and water to produce bicarbonate
Khan et al. [43] FA + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 Carbonation and carbonates. For low-calcium systems, the pore solution trans-
resistance forms from high alkalinity to sodium carbonate [37,51]. Besides,
Nkwaju et al. [44] LS NaOH + Na2SiO3 Wet-dry cycles and
the carbonation product of geopolymer concrete is differently
heat resistance
Park et al. [45] GBFS Ca(OH)2 Chloride resistance exposed to natural and accelerated carbonation, depending on
the carbon dioxide concentration [24,37,52]. The authors [52] also
Where NP is natural pozzolan; FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag;
found the Na2O-CO2-H2O phase of geopolymer binder is more com-
SL is granulated blast furnace slag; LS is Lateritic soil; POFA is palm oil fuel ash.
plex in terms of potential hydrous phases and phase boundaries
compared to OPC after carbonation.
Table 2 The pH value is mainly controlled by hydration product calcium
. Comparison of durability mechanism between GPC and OPCC [37–41,46–48]. hydroxide in OPC, while pH value of geopolymer concrete is only
Categories of GPC OPCC controlled by pore solution. The pH value of geopolymer concrete
durability decreases obviously during carbonization due to the formation of
Carbonation The alkalis in the pore reacts Carbon dioxide penetrates in hydrogen carbonate and carbonates. The bicarbonate products
resistance with external carbon dioxide to the concrete and reacts are mostly formed during the accelerated carbonization process,
and water to produce with cement hydration leading to a higher decline in the pH value of the geopolymer con-
bicarbonate and product (calcium hydroxide, crete. As shown in Fig. 4, the pH value of each specimen exposed to
carbonates/transformation of calcium silicate hydrates etc.)
3% accelerated carbonation decreased significantly and attained a
the pore solution to produce calcium carbonate
Acid The Si-O-Si and Si-O-Al The C-S-H and Na-S-H of fully carbonated stage. The phenolphthalein can be sprayed to
corrosion bonds are broken with calcium hydroxide, calcium assess the carbonation depth, and the solution turns to dark pink
resistance depolymerisation of silicate hydrates etc. in the uncarbonated area and remains colorless in the carbonated
aluminosilicate polymers and decalcifies in acid solution
area. Khan et al [43] classified the degree of carbonation according
liberation of silicic acid in and hence Ca/Si ratio
acid solution, then fissures or diminishes, then free calcium to the change of phenolphthalein color (include uncarbonated area,
crystallization of zeolites are forms the gypsum and partially carbonated area, and carbonated area), however, the bor-
formed ettringite der between colored and colorless areas is unstable, which is quite
Sulfate The alkalis migrated into the Sulfate ions react with different from OPC concrete carbonization area as shown in Fig. 5
resistance sulfate carbonation solution hydrated calcium aluminate
[53,54]. A similar phenomenon occurred on the 7-year old natu-
and the cation (generally and calcium hydroxide to
2+ 2+
Mg and Ca ) reacts with an form ettringite and gypsum. rally carbonated slag-based geopolymer [55]. The Fourier transfor-
alkali activator solution in Then, sulfate carbonation mation infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) was also used to analyzed
subsurface areas to form decomposes C-S-H to carbonation profiles. Chang et al. [53] mentioned that the areas
ettringite / ions exchange M S H.
of partial carbonation (pH ranges: 9.0–11.5) could not be tested
between solution and binder
Heat Some new phases (nepheline The hydration products of
by phenolphthalein, while the detection of FTIR was twice than
resistance and gehlenite etc.) are cement (calcium silicate, of phenolphthalein. In addition, the degree of carbonation can be
formed at high temperature. calcium aluminate, calcium
Then, the alkaline ions (Na+) hydroxide etc.) are
migrate out of the system decomposed and dehydrated
and the structure of gels are at high temperature.
dehydrated.
Chloride The GPC and OPC are similar in the mechanism of frost
resistance resistance. Chloride ions, either self-or external, are
transported into concrete by diffusion, capillary absorption,
infiltration, and electrochemical migration, causing corrosion
of steel bar. Then the stimulation of corrosion products can
form internal stresses around the steel, resulting in further
cracking and spalling.
between geopolymer concrete (GPC) and ordinary Portland cement

concrete (OPCC) in different environments.
3. Carbonation resistance
The carbonation is harmful to concrete structures, which

reduces the alkalinity of the pore solution, destroys surface oxide Fig. 4. pH value of GPC after a carbonation test with 3% CO2 [43].
4
Fig. 5. Color change for GPC after a carbonation test with 5% CO2 [54].
also evaluated by chemical phase, mechanical properties, porosity mechanical properties. A summary of carbonation resistance tests
of concrete, and volume change [56]. Li et al. [57] found that cal- of geopolymer concrete as compared to OPC is given in Table 3.
cium carbonate particles distributed mainly in gel pore and spaces Carbonation resistance is always influenced by many factors.
in C-S-H interlayers, resulting in volume contraction of slag-based Table 4 shows the influence factors of carbonation resistance
geopolymer. Ye et al. [51] also pointed out that the carbonation- including the positive factor, negative factor, and others. The mate-
induced volume change may due to the precipitation of crystals, rial in brackets of Table 4 indicates the precursor materials used in
and the poor volumetric stability at ambient environment restricts the corresponding study. Carbonation rate, exposure time, and cur-
the engineering application of geopolymer concrete. ing temperature have a great influence on the carbonation of
For another thing, the OPC concrete has a higher Ca/Si ratio of C- geopolymer concrete. Many researchers have also improved the
S-H gel than geopolymer concrete, which causing carbonize of OPC pore structure and reactant composition of geopolymer concrete
slower than general C-S-H gel. During carbonation, calcium car- by adding calcium hydroxide [63], Portland cement [63], nano-
bonate precipitation is formed on the surface of OPC concrete, TiO2 [64], micro silica [66], and slag content [54]. Li et al. [57] dis-
which forms a barrier for carbon dioxide diffusion, while internal covered that the slag activated with NaOH were more resistant
porosity may have increased [58]. Therefore, OPC concrete shows (about 13.6 strength loss) to carbonation than NaOH/Na2SiO3
a lower strength loss than geopolymer concrete. Bernal et al. [37] (26%). The addition of nano-TiO2 refines the microstructure and
observed that the compressive strength of fly ash/slag based improves carbonation resistance of fluidized bed fly ash based-
geopolymer decreases linearly after carbonization, which results geopolymer concrete. Duan et al. [64] reported that the carbona-
in the formation of N-A-S-H gel. It is also reported that geopolymer tion depth decreased with the increase of nano-TiO2, and the car-
concretes after carbonation have lower extent of reaction and bonation depths at 180 days are only 42% to the reference
lower mechanical properties [43–47]. However, Li et al. [54] specimens with 5 wt% addition. Behfarnia et al. [66] investigated
pointed out that the fine cracks disappeared and the coarse cracks carbonation depth of slag-based geopolymer concrete produced
became small after exposing to 5% accelerated carbonation via partially replacing slag by micro silica in proportion of 5, 10,
through the SEM images of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer and 15 wt%. Carbonation depth of concrete being controlled at
as see in Fig. 6. Therefore, the compressive strength of specimen 4% accelerated carbonation in two cycle of 14 and 28 days. The
improved from 29.7 to 34.2 MPa after the carbonation. Shi et al. results show that the replacement slag with micro silica had a pos-
[59] also achieved similar conclusions. They [59] found that the itive effect on the properties of geopolymer with 32% and 34%
Carbonation of C3AH6 phase of activated slag mortar leads to the decreases in carbonation depth after 14 and 28 days accelerated
increase of the molar volume of solids, resulting in an increase of carbonation cycles, respectively. However, increasing the content
Fig. 6. SEM images of fly ash-based GPC (a) before and (b) after exposing to 5% accelerated carbonation [54].
5
Table 3
. The carbonation resistance tests of geopolymer concrete.
Precursors Activator CO2 Exposure Reaction products Resistance Ref.

concentrate time compared
to OPC
FA NaOH + Na2SiO3 1 or 3% 6 weeks Natron Worse [43]
1% 3 months – Worse [65]
GBFS NaOH; NaOH + NaCl; NaOH + Na2CO3; 400 ppm 28 days Calcite; hydrotalcite Worse [51]
KOH
NaOH + Na2SiO3 1–5% 7 days Vaterite; nahcolite; calcite; zeolitic; aragonite – [52]
Vaterite; natron nahcolite; huntite; calcite; – [37]
aragonite
20% 45 days Calcite; Vaterite Worse [57]
10–20% 4 months Calcite Worse [58]
4% 28 days – Worse [66]
FA + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% 8 weeks – Worse [54]
1% 120 days Calcite – [67]
GBFS + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 1 or 3% 500 h – – [68]
3% 6 weeks Calcite – [52]
GBFS + BA NaOH + Na2SiO3 20% 60 days Portlandite; calcite – [63]
FBFA NaOH + Na2SiO3 20% 180 days – – [64]
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; FBFA is fluidized bed fly ash; MK is metakaolin; BA is bottom ash.
Table 4
. The influence factors of carbonation resistance.
Classification of influence Variable

factors
Positive factors The addition of calcium hydroxide (FA, GBFS) [63], Portland cement (FA, GBFS) [63], nano-TiO2 (FA) [64], micro silica (GBFS) [66] and slag
content in the binder (FA, GBFS) [54,58]; heat curing (FA, GBFS) [54]; high alkali dosage and high silicate modulus (GBFS) [59]
Negative factors High carbonation rate (FA) [43]; long exposure time (FA, GBFS, MK) [43,52,55]; Ca/Si ratio of C-S-H (FA) [60], high MK content in the binder
(GBFS, MK) [62]; attack environment (FA) [65]; high porosity of the concrete surface (FA) [65]
Others Content and type of aluminosilicate source materials (FA, GBFS) [37,56] and activator (GBFS) [57,61]; activator silicate modulus (GBFS)
[62]; the design mix of concrete (FA, GBFS, MK) [54,61–66]; relative humidity (GBFS, MK) [68]; Age of Concrete (FA) [65]; Na2O
concentration (FA, GBFS) [67]; water/binder (FA, GBFS) [67]; Silicate modulus (FA, GBFS) [69]
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; MK is metakaolin.
of MK in the binder will lead to the formation of secondary alumi- bonds are broken with depolymerisation of aluminosilicate poly-
nosilicate phases and increasing the susceptibility to carbonization mers and liberation of silicic acid in acid solution, then fissures
[62]. Zhang et al. [67] found that the Na2O concentration and or crystallization of zeolites are formed [38,72]. However, the
water/binder ratio of alkali-activated metakaolin-slag binary sys- degradation mechanism is also function of the type of acid, for
tem have a significant influence on the formation of C-A-S-H gels intense, the geopolymer concrete suffer from leaching of alkali
and crystallinity of calcium carbonates after carbonation. The gas and alkali earth metals and shrinkage after hydrochloric acid
permeability of geopolymers is very sensitive to the relative attack, while the gypsum crystals deposition and growth in sulfuric
humidity of the ambient environment, and the fastest carbonation acid at the age of 2 years [74]. Overall, geopolymers have dense gel
rate occurs at 65 ± 5% relative humidity in the range of 50–80% layers and lower permeability than OPC concrete. Zheng et al.
[68]. Thus, the pre-drying process of the specimens will produce [74,75] reported that the mechanical properties of fly ash-based
microcracks, which will affect the carbonization resistance. geopolymer deteriorated slightly when immersed in 5% H2SO4
after 28 days and the corroded concretes still conformed the acid
soaking safety index of the standard GB 50212–2002 [76]. Fig. 7a
4. Acid corrosion resistance
presents the visual appearance of specimens exposed to 5%
H2SO4 for 30 days [77]. The OPC concrete showed the severe ero-
The average pH of precipitation in China in 2019 was 5.58, and
sion with soft white depositions on the surface, while fly ash-
the proportion of acid rain in cities was about 16.8%, promoting the
based geopolymer intact relatively attribute to the lower CaO con-
dissolution and neutralization of the OPC concrete [11,70]. In addi-
tent. Results also indicated that the addition of the nano-silica has
tion, the service life of concrete structures exposing to sewage,
to positive influence on durability, however, the effect is not obvi-
industrial wastewater, and microbiological acid attack was also
ous under short-term acid erosion as shown in Fig. 7(b). Weight
limited [71]. The calcium salts form and structure loses strength
gain in the early exposure in H2SO4 due to the pores absorbed
rapidly for OPC in the acidic environment. It is reported that acid
the solution. Then, the concretes lose their weight with alkali
corrosion resistance of OPC was affected by the quality of protec-
and some material dissolution [77,78].
tive layer and the hydration product [47,71]. For geopolymer con-
Bakharev et al. [72] immersed slag-based geopolymer concrete
crete, acid corrosion resistance is influenced by the
in HAc solution of pH 4 for 1 year and found that the percentage of
depolymerisation of aluminosilicate polymers and the liberation
strength loss of geopolymer was 33% compared to 47% of OPC con-
of silicic acid [38,47]. The degree of acid corrosion can be generally
crete. Similar results have been shown in class F fly ash-based
ascertained by visual appearance physical properties, weight loss,
paste [73]. Fernandez-Jimenez et al. [73] concluded that fly ash-
and corrosion depth of geopolymer/cement concrete [72–73].
based geopolymer performed better in terms of the nature of cor-
It has been reported that the geopolymer concrete is more dur-
rosion and higher residual strength compared to cement paste.
able against acid attack than OPC concrete. The Si-O-Si and Si-O-Al
6
Fig. 7. Visual appearance (a) and weight loss (b) of specimens in 5% H2SO4 after 30 days [77].
Fig. 8. SEM images fly ash-based GPC with 10 wt% OPC addition (a) before and (b) after exposing to 5% H2SO4 for 1 year [79].
Table 5
. The acid corrosion resistance tests of geopolymer concrete.
Precursors Activator Acid solution Corrosion Reaction Resistance compared Ref.

time products to OPC
GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 pH = 4, HAc 12 months – Better [72]
FA NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% H2SO4 1 month – Better [77]
10% H2SO4 24 weeks Gypsum, ettringite – [78]
5% HAc; 5% H2SO4 5 months Amorphous gel, zeolites Better [47]
pH = 3, HCl/H2SO4 2 years Gypsum, calcite Better [74]
5% H3PO4 12 months – Better [81]
10% H2SO4 24 weeks – – [82]
4 M HCl 4 weeks – – [83]
RHA NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% HCl 84 days – Better [4284]
5% HCl; 5% H2SO4 28 days – Better
FA + POFA NaOH + Na2SiO3 2% H2SO4 18 months Zeolites, gypsum Better [38]
FBFA + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 2% H2SO4 + 2% HCl 28 days – Better [85]
FA + RM NaOH + Na2SiO3 pH = 3, H2SO4 120 days – Better [86]
MK + TS NaOH + Na2SiO3 pH = 1, 3, 5, H2SO4 28 days – – [87]
WM NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% HCl; 5% H2SO4; 5% HNO3 56 days – Better [80]
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; RHA is rice husk ash; POFA is palm oil fuel ash; FBFA is fluidized bed fly ash; MK is metakaolin; RM is red mud; TS is
tannery sludge; WM is waste mud.
Mehta et al. [79] reported the degradation in strength may attri- tance including the positive factor, negative factor, and others.
bute to the broken of Al-O and Si-O bonds, in addition to calcium The types of aluminosilicate source materials, activator, acid solu-
in the system react with H2SO4 to form sulfates and aluminates tion, and aggregate have a great effect on acid corrosion resistance.
of calcium as shown in Fig. 8. A summary of acid corrosion resis- Many researchers found the acid corrosion resistance may
tance tests of geopolymer concrete as compared to OPC is given decrease when the type of acid solution and precursors changed
in Table 5. [74,80–83]. Two main methods can be used to improve acid corro-
Acid corrosion resistance is also always influenced by many fac- sion resistance of geopolymer concrete: (a) filling concrete pores to
tors. Table 6 shows the influence factors of acid corrosion resis- increase compactness (such as the inclusion of polypropylene-
7
Table 6 unreacted binder particles (Fig. 9a). Formation of gypsum crystals

. The influence factors of acid corrosion resistance. encrusted in the geopolymer concrete lead expansion and promote
Classification of Variable localized cracks after 1 year of exposure to 10% MgSO4 solution, as
influence factors shown in Fig. 9(b) and (c) [97]. High-calcium systems have better
Positive factors The addition of nano-SiO2 (FA) [77,78], polypropy- resistance in Na2SO4 comparing to MgSO4 solution, which is unlike
lene- (FA) [88], steel-, basalt-, glass- fibers (FA, GBFS, low-calcium systems. Exposure to Na2SO4 seems to favor the struc-
MK) [89] and bio-additives (FA) [90]; ordered structural evolution of geopolymer gel, while the Mg2+ in solution pro-
ture, low porosity of the concrete (GBFS) [72]; heat
curing (FBFA, MK) [85], high ratio of Na2SiO3/NaOH
motes to decalcification and M S H type phases decay of the
ratio of activator (FA, GBFS, NZ) [91], microwave high-calcium systems [98]. Saavedra et al. [98] found greater
radiation (FA) [92] mechanical resistance loss of fly ash/slag geopolymer concrete by
Negative factors Water absorption (FA), high apparent porosity and 33% exposed to MgSO4 for 360 days, which were higher than the
sorptivity of concrete (FA) [82], long exposure time
value in Na2SO4 solution. However, palm oil fuel ash-based
(FA) [47,77], high concentration of acid solution (FA)
[83], the inclusion of more than 10 wt% OPC (MW) geopolymer lost most mechanical properties and weight after
[80], high alkali content Na2O % of activation (FA) [82] exposed to 5% Na2SO4 solution [98]. Their findings showed that
Others Types of aluminosilicate source materials (GBFS, RHA, the intensity of gismondine, calcite, and other peaks changed in
MK, RM, TS) [72,84,86–87], activator (FA, GBFS) [80– Na2SO4, resulting in the reduction of the migration of ions from
82], acid solution (FA, GBFS) [74,80–81] and aggre-
within, which unlike MgSO4 specimens. Jin et al. [99] pointed out
gate (GBFS) [80]
that the diffusion of Mg2+ ions into geopolymer and the migration
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; NZ is natural zeolite; MK of alkali metal cations into the solution proceed are simultaneous,
is metakaolin; RM is red mud; RHA is rice husk ash; MW is waste mud; TS is
and reach equilibrium at a specific time.
tannery sludge.
However, low-calcium alkali-activated systems allow the
exchange of ions between sulfate solution and network structure,
steel-, basalt-, glass-fibers, etc.), and (b) to modify the chemical which may be much more resistant to sulfate attack because of less
composition of concrete and to prevent acidic solution corrosion formation of crystalline phases associated with expansion
(such as the inclusion of nano-SiO2, bio-additives, etc.). Karthik [96,100,101]. For example, Duan et al. [102] observed the metakao-
et al. [90] used fly ash-slag and bio-additives as raw materials to lin addition can form a modified microstructure and improve the
prepared geopolymer concrete and conducted a chemical resis- sulfate resistance of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Metakao-
tance in H2SO4 corrosion. The authors [90] found the addition of lin based polymers also show great resistance exposure to different
would fill the capillary pores of geopolymer and alleviated the concentrations of Na2SO4 solutions [103]. Therefore, the sulfate
deterioration of the sample. Rajak et al. [88] reported that geopoly- resistance of geopolymer concrete depended largely on the cal-
mer concretes with polypropylene fiber addition have better dura- cium concentration of system, and it is better to choose raw mate-
bility than control, which is attributed to the great resistance of rials with low calcium content to against sulfate attack [96,99].
polypropylene to alcohol, organic acids, esters, and ketones and In many previous studies, the geopolymer concrete performs
lower capillary porosity. Chindaprasirt et al. [92] point out micro- better in sulfate solution than OPC concrete, and even superior to
wave radiation with frequency of 2.45 GHz promoted dissolution sulfate-resistant PC when exposed to Na2SO4 solution [26,104].
of the glassy phase of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete and form The degree of sulfate corrosion can be generally ascertained by
a dense of gels, which provide a new way to prepare geopolymer visual appearance physical properties, weight loss, water absorp-
paste. However, some factors have a negative impact on the acid tion, voids ratio, expansion strain, and concentration of Si leached
resistance of geopolymer concrete. Thokchom et al. [82] found into the sulfate solution, etc. [98,99,105]. Rodríguez et al. [100] and
the specimens with higher Na2O content lost its alkalinity slower Douglas et al. [106] observed that the visual appearance, mass,
than lesser Na2O content, which has higher residual compressive strength, expansion, and dynamic modulus of elasticity of slag-
strength under sulfuric acid attack. The authors [82] also con- based geopolymer concrete change little after exposing to the 5%
cluded specimens with higher apparent porosity and sorptivity Na2SO4 solution for 90 and 120 days, which perform better than
have lesser resistance. OPC concrete. However, after aging for 270 days, a higher deposi-
tion of salts and cracks were observed in the fly ash/ slag geopoly-
mer concrete, the physical deterioration of the OPC concrete was
5. Sulfate resistance significantly greater for the same exposure times (Fig. 10) [98].
The authors [98] also found that geopolymer concrete did not exhi-
Sulfate ions are widely found in soil, groundwater, seawater, bit dimensional changes during the first 6 months immersed 5%
decaying organic matter, and industrial wastewater. They are dif- MgSO4 and Na2SO4 solutions. A similar phenomenon occurred on
fused into the OPC concrete through multiple channels, followed the fly ash/metakaolin-based geopolymer, longer exposure causes
by a reaction with cement hydration products. The main reaction higher strength loss [102]. A summary of sulfate resistance tests
products include ettringite, gypsum, and thaumasite causing of geopolymer concrete as compared to OPC is given in Table 7.
expansion and crack spalling of concrete. Besides, disintegration Table 8 shows the influence factors of sulfate resistance includ-
is caused by the destruction of C–S–H [93,94]. In addition to chem- ing the positive factor, negative factor, and others. The types of alu-
ical attack, salt crystallization (repeated dissolution of the solid salt minosilicate source materials, activator, sulfate solution, and
and re-crystallization) is generated and further causes the volume admixture have a great effect on sulfate resistance. El-Sayed
expansion of OPC concrete [95]. The sulfate resistance of OPC con- et al. [39] reported the slag-based geopolymer activated with
crete is influenced by the contents of C3A, C3S, and concrete density 6 wt% NaOH achieved a higher gain of strength loss of 49% after
[96]. exposure to 5% MgSO4 for 6 months, comparing to 21% activated
The erosion mechanism of geopolymer erosion at the sulfate NaOH and Na2SiO3 (3:3), which may attribute to excess hydroxide
environment is different depending on calcium content. High- ions that in turn form excess ettringite. Besides, the strength of
calcium alkali-activated systems have similar erosion mechanisms concrete activated by two kinds of activators is very close to that
to OPC due to the similarity of hydration products. From the SEM of concrete cured in ambient temperature. Guo et al. [101] illus-
images of fly ash/slag-based geopolymer, unexposed specimens trated the influence of hybrid fiber for sulfate resistance of
show the formed gel with some pores which may attribute to the metakaolin-based geopolymer. The authors [35] reported that the
8
Fig. 9. SEM images of 50% fly ash and 50% slag based geopolymer before exposure (a) and after 1 year of exposure to 10% MgSO4 (b), (c) [97].
hybrid fibers improve sulfate resistance resulted in the relief of

stress concentration and reduction of microcracks. Liu et al. [111]
provided a comprehensive review of reuse of waste glasses in the
preparation of geopolymer, and they reported that the inclusion
of glass powder led to the reduction in strength loss of alkali-
activated mortars due to the complete polymerization reaction.
Hu et al. [112] replaced fly ash by zeolite or bentonite in proportion
of 10 and 15 wt% and obtained reduced porosity, mainly because of
the geopolymerization of zeolite and filling effect of bentonite.
Özodabas [113] found the 10 wt% addition of siliceous fine pumice
powder of slag-based geopolymer concrete shows the maximum
compressive strength (of 47.6 MPa) after 90 days exposure to
10% MgSO4. However, Ismail et al. [108] observed vertically gyp-
sum vein in the BSE elemental images of fly ash/slag-based con-
crete in 5% MgSO4 for 6 months, which due to the release of Ca2+
into the pore solution. The authors [108] also concluded that a
higher concentration of SO2- 4 helps the precipitation of gypsum.
6. Heat resistance
In 2018, the number of building fires accounted for more than

50% of Chinese total fire accidents, resulting in enormous economic
losses and casualty, therefore, it is essential to improve heat resis-
tance of concrete for the sake of ensuring safety for life and prop-
erty [114]. At temperatures of around 300-400℃, the hydration
product of OPC paste is decomposed and dehydrated, then water
Fig. 10. Visual appearance of geopolymer concretes exposed to 5% Na2SO4 and 5% and the entrained air ruptures the internal walls of the micropores,
MgSO4 solutions for 270 days [98]. which caused a rapid decline in strength [40,85]. The C-S-H and the
concrete materials are considered the main inter-factors affecting
Table 7
. The sulfate corrosion resistance tests of geopolymer concrete.
Precursors Activator Sulfates solution Corrosion time Reaction Resistance compared Ref.
products to OPC
GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 10% Na2SO4; 10% MgSO4 12 months – Better; Worse [107]
Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4 90 days Ettringite, gypsum Better [100]
MK + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% MgSO4 6 months Ettringite, gypsum – [101]
FA + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 10% MgSO4 48 weeks Gypsum Better [97]
5% Na2SO4; 5% MgSO4 360 days –; Gypsum Better [98]
5% Na2SO4 180 days – – [109]
Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4; 5% MgSO4 90 days –; Gypsum – [108]
FA + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4 180 days Ettringite, gypsum – [102]
GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% MgSO4 6 months Ettringite, gypsum – [39]
NP KOH + Na2SiO3 2.5% Na2SO4; 2.5% MgSO4 6 months – – [36]
FA + RHA NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4 200 days – – [42]
RHA NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4; 5% MgSO4 28 days Gypsum – [84]
MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 5–20% Na2SO4 120 days Thenardite – [101]
POFA NaOH + Na2SiO3 5% Na2SO4, 5% MgSO4, 2.5% Na2SO4 + 2.5% MgSO4 9 months – – [102]
BA NaOH + Na2SiO3 10% Na2SO4 360 days – – [110]
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; MK is metakaolin; NZ is natural zeolite; RHA is rice husk ash; POFA is palm oil fuel ash; BA is bottom ash.
9
Table 8 preparation method. Fernandez-Jimenez et al. [119] reported

. The influence factors of sulfate resistance. geopolymer performed better in mechanical strength and durabil-
Classification of Variable ity, particularly concerning heat resistance. Xu et al. [120] pointed
influence factors out that the strength increasing may due to the drying and further
Positive factors The addition of bio-additives (FA) [90], metakaolin hydration of geopolymer. Bernal et al. [121] found the network of
(FA) [102], mineral fiber (MK) [103], organic fiber geopolymer softens and the interparticle spaces in the geopolymer
(MK) [103], zeolite (FA) [112], bentonite (FA) [112], gel collapse were observed by SEM images, as shown in Fig. 12.
siliceous fine pumice powder (GBFS) [113]; high ratio
of Na2SiO3/NaOH ratio of activator (FA, GBFS, NZ)
Remarkably, the geopolymer concretes are chemically stable and
[91]; microwave radiation (FA) [92], heat curing (FA, only have phase changes at high temperatures. Temuujin et al.
GBFS) [97]; high NaOH solution molarity (FA, GBFS) [122] reported metakaolin-based geopolymer have an amorphous
[97] structure and no phase change at 1000℃. Perera et al. [123] also
Negative factors High ratio of alkaline solution to binder ratio (FA,
found that phase was no significant melting after 1200℃ curing,
GBFS) [97]; long exposure time (FA, GBFS) [98];
higher porosity and loose structure (FBFA, MK) [85]; mainly in the form of leucite.
high concentration of sulfate solution (MK, FA, GBFS) The heat resistance of geopolymer concrete is also manifested
[103,107] in instability and shrinkage. The mass loss of geopolymer concrete
Others Types of aluminosilicate source materials (GBFS, RHA, relatively lower than OPC concrete after 600℃ exposure due to Ca
MK, FA, POFA) [98–109], sulfate solution (FA, GBFS)
(OH)2 decomposition of OPC (Fig. 11b) [85]. Sarker et al. [124]
[102,107]; the ratio of NaOH/Na2SiO3 (GBFS) [39]; the
calcium concentration source materials (FA, GBFS, found the OPC concrete suffered severe spalling after 800 and
MK, POFA) [96–105] 1000℃ fire in comparison to minor surface cracklings in geopoly-
mer concrete. They [124] also concluded that the differential
Where FA is fly ash; MK is metakaolin; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; NZ is
natural zeolite; RHA is rice husk ash; POFA is palm oil fuel ash. expansions between aggregates and geopolymer binders are the
main reason that caused failure. Ye et al. [125] reported that
tailing/slag-based geopolymer exhibits severely decrease by more
the heat resistance of OPC [85]. Thus, many researchers have than 40 MPa after 1000℃ fire, while shows a strength gain after
focused attention on the boron active belite cement [115], magne- heating at 1200 °C, which may attribute to the sintering and den-
sium oxychloride cement [116], etc. with excellent heat resistance. sification. According to Kong et al. [126], the fly ash-based geopoly-
The geopolymer concretes generally show better heat resis- mer underwent contraction of about 1% between 200 and 300℃
tance compared to OPC concrete. Gourley et al. [117] compared and a further 0.6% between 700 and 800℃. Duxson et al. [127]
the heat resistance of geopolymer and cement, and found the for- found the first significant shrinkage of concrete may attribute to
mer is essentially a kind of glass, unlike cement, which is a hydrate. the dehydration of free water, therefore, the water content has a
Visual appearance, residual strength, and thermal conductivity are great influence on heat resistance. When the temperature
used as indicators for heat resistance of geopolymer [40,118]. Duan exceeded 550℃, the researchers found an inconsistent trend of
[85] et al. investigated durability parameters of using fluidized bed expansion or contraction [126–128]. The geopolymer gel viscous
fly ash and metakaolin as precursors activated by a combination of flows fill the pores, resulting in volume expansion by Rickard
Na2SiO3 and NaOH solution. Thermal durability was measured in et al. [128]. However, some researchers [126,127] only measured
terms of temperature profile, compressive strength, and stability. shrinkage in the temperature range of 550 to 900℃. Due to the
As shown in Fig. 11a, the authors observed geopolymer concrete excellent heat resistance, geopolymers have been used to make
gains strength when heated to 400℃, while OPC concrete shows thermal insulation materials and energy storage concretes. Besides,
a significant drop of nearly 100%. And geopolymer concretes only the geopolymers coatings on steel maintained structural integrity
have a slight decrease at 1000℃ temperature exposure [85]. There- at high temperatures [122]. A summary of heat resistance tests
fore, proper heat-cured geopolymer concrete is considered an ideal of geopolymer concrete as compared to OPC is given in Table 9.
Fig. 11. Compressive strength change (a) and weight loss (b) of specimens curing at various temperatures for 28 days [85].
10
Fig. 12. SEM images of metakaolin-based GPC (a) 7 days of curing and (b) after at 1000℃ temperature exposure [121].
Table 9
. The heat resistance tests of geopolymer concrete.
Precursors Activator Heating Heating time Reaction products Resistance compared Ref.
temperature to OPC
FA Na2SiO3; 1000℃ 1h Nepheline; albite Better [4040129]
Na2SiO3 + Na2CO3 (S) 1000℃ 1h Calcite; gaylussite Better
NaOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 30 min – Better
1000℃ 30 days – Better [124]
800℃ 7 days – – [126]
KOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 1h Nepheline; albite; leucite Better [131]
FBFA + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 28 days Nepheline; gehlenite Better [85]
FA + MK K2SiO3 500℃ 1h – Better [118]
GBFS + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 2h Zeolite – [121]
GBFS NaOH 800℃ 2h – – [130]
MK KOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 1h – Better [131]
NaOH + Na2SiO3; KOH + K2SiO3; 800℃ 1h – – [132]
BFA KOH + Na2SiO3 1000℃ 1h – Better [131]
TL NaOH + Na2SiO3 1000/1200℃ 1h Anorthite; Tridymite – [125]
EFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 700℃ 1h – Better [133]
Where Na2SiO3 + Na2CO3 (S) is 8% solid sodium silicate + 8% Na2CO3; FA is fly ash; FBFA: fluidized bed fly ash; MK is metakaolin; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; BFA is
biomass fly-ash; TL is tailing; EFS is Elazığ ferrochrome slag.
Table 10 minosilicate source materials, activator, heating temperature, and

. The influence factors of heat resistance. preparation methods may affect the heat resistance of geopolymer
Classification of Variable concrete. Kong et al. [132] studied the properties of metakaolin-
influence factors based geopolymer concrete which was activated by three types
Positive factors The addition of sugarcane bagasse fibers (LS) [44], of alkali activator: ‘Na2SiO3 with KOH’; ‘Na2SiO3 with NaOH’, and
chopped carbon fibers (FA, MK) [118], phosphogyp- ‘K2SiO3 with KOH’. The results indicated [132] that Na2SiO3-
sum (GBFS) [130]; highly porous structure of con- based geopolymer has higher strength in ambient temperature,
crete (FA) [129]; high-temperature generally lower
while K2SiO3-based geopolymer has lower damage after heating
than 400℃ curing [119–120]; higher content of
calcium in system (MK, GBFS) [121] curing between Si/Al ratio of 1.38–1.49. Chindaprasirt et al. [134]
Negative factors Longer exposure time (FA, FBFA, MK) [85,126]; higher investigated the influence of preparation methods on heat resis-
temperature (GBFS, MK) [120,129–130]; higher tance and hardening property of fly ash-based geopolymer paste.
heating rates (MK) [127]; the addition basalt aggre- They concluded that [134] the dense structure and low porosity
gates (FA) [126]
Others Types of aluminosilicate source materials (FA, GBFS,
can be formed after 60 s of high-speed mixing. Duxson et al.
MK, BFA, TL) [118–132]; the type of alkali activator [127] point out that the rate of water diffusion from the concrete
(MK) [132]; Si/Al ratio of the system (MK) [132]; the would change the energy barrier to densification may result in
age of geopolymer (MK) [132]; the water content of skeletal densification. The geopolymer concrete prepared with
concrete (MK) [127]; preparation methods including
additional additives showed high heat resistance. In case of lateri-
mixing time, mixing speed, and setting time (FA)
[134] tic soil-based geopolymer, Nkwaju et al. [44] found that concrete
has exhibited thermal conductivity decrease from 0.77 to
Where LS is lateritic soil; FA is fly ash; MK is metakaolin; GBFS is granulated blast
0.55 W/mK with 7.5 wt% sugarcane bagasse fibers addition. Zhang
furnace slag; FBFA: fluidized bed fly ash; BFA is biomass fly-ash; TL is tailing.
et al. [118] investigated how the chopped carbon fibers in fly ash/
metakaolin geopolymer activated by K2SiO3 affecting the heat
Table 10 shows the influence factors of heat resistance includ- resistance. The authors [118] found the addition of fibers enhanced
ing the positive factor, negative factor, and others. The types of alu- bending strength exposure to 20 ~ 500℃, while but had a slight
effect on compressive strength. Kong et al. [126] found geopoly-
11
mer/aggregate composites show higher strength in ambient tem- ASTM C1202, the results which would influence by different solu-
perature, however, basalt-composite show a 58% strength decrease tion chemistry on the current flow. The NT Build 492 test method
after 600℃ exposure due to the differential thermal expansion developed from the electro-accelerated chloride ion non-steady-
between geopolymer and aggregate. Besides, longer exposure time state migration test has a good theoretical basis according to Wang
and higher heating temperature also have a negative effect on heat et al. [145]. As shown in Fig. 13, the silver nitrate (AgNO3) solution
resistance [85,117,120,129,130]. can precipitate the chloride ion and is often used to evaluate chlo-
ride penetration depths, and mix proportion of binding gel has sig-
nificantly effect on chloride resistance [140]. Ravikumar et al. [146]
7. Chloride resistance
used total charge passed to measured transport coefficients of
NaOH and Na2SiO3 activated slag-based geopolymer, which has
Steel corrosion has caused a great deal of damage, and statisti-
better accuracy. However, the correlation between electric acceler-
cally, about billions of dollars were spent in the US each year on
ated chloride test and long-term chloride diffusion as well as the
maintenance of concrete structures and more than 89% of bridges
testing method for chloride binding should be established and fur-
serviced in China’s coastal regions for 7–25 years suffered from
ther improved according to previous studies [140,147,148].
corrosion [32,135]. Chloride corrosion is thought to be the primary
Shi et al. [143,148] pointed out that the relationship between
cause of steel bar corrosion in concrete which may lead to a reduc-
chloride penetration and porosity of geopolymer concrete is simi-
tion in strength and stability of structure, and even outweighing
lar to OPC concrete. However, the geopolymer concretes generally
that due to carbonation [136]. Internal chloride comes from sea
show better chloride resistance compared to OPC concrete gener-
sand and chloride contaminated water etc. External chloride corro-
ally, which may related to the absence of Ca(OH)2.Tennakoon
sion environment mainly includes coastal, marine, salty soil, and
et al. [149] found that the corrosion current of steel bar of fly
ice-melting salt environments, in which the damage of concrete
ash/slag-based geopolymer concrete exposed to 0.6 M NaCl solu-
structure in marine or coastal zones is the most serious. The ways
tion in lower than OPC concrete (Fig. 14). Besides, the authors
chloride ions ingress concrete depends on the environmental con-
[149] also found that the apparent chloride diffusion coefficient
ditions, including permeation, absorption (or capillary suction),
solution of OPC concrete is higher than geopolymer concrete, and
electrochemical migration [137,138]. The porosity of the paste is
the free chloride took a shorter time to reach steel bar in OPC con-
considered the main inter-factors affecting the chloride resistance
crete. Kayyali et al. [150] studied that replacing cement with pro-
of OPC, the poorer the pore structures are, and the greater the cor-
portions of slag up to 70%, and the slag-based geopolymer
rosion is. [136–139].
concrete still has better chloride resistance than OPC concrete.
The mechanisms of chloride binding for alkali-activated materi-
Besides, less swelling and cracks of geopolymer concrete were
als are associate with a variety of ways. Ismail et al. [140] and
occurred in 30% CaCl2 solutions and established higher strength
Zhang et al. [141] thought the chloride binding of fly ash-slag
in 5% MgCl2 solution [151–152]. Fig. 13(d) also shows that OPC
based geopolymer was mainly dependent on physical adsorption,
concrete has the deepest chloride penetration depth of 25 mm,
while in the study of Ke et al. [142], two types of Friedel’s salt were
while the geopolymer concretes presented lower depths between
found in Na2CO3-activated slag containing CaCl2 solution. In terms
1 and 10 mm.
of the chloride migration tests, the rapid chloride penetration test
Recent results have demonstrated that the high content of sul-
(RCPT) used for OPC is believed unsuitable for geopolymer, owing
fide (S2- and S2O2-3 ) in slag-based geopolymer concrete will con-
to the different chemical properties of pore solutions [143]. Past
sume the available oxygen, and then control the steel corrosion
researches on the chloride resistance of geopolymer concrete were
[149,152]. For another thing, Kayyali et al. [150] and Shi et al.
carried out by using different methods according to (a) ASTM
[153] both found that the reaction products, hydrotalcite could
C1202 or AASH-TO T277, (b) NT Build 492, (c) NT Build 443
absorb chloride ions. Ismail et al. [140] also found that the trend
[144]. Among them, the rapid chloride permeability test is based
of chloride migration coefficients is similar to the result in ponding
on the measurement of electrical conductivity as described in
tests, and the chloride resistance is closely related to the structure
compactness and the pore structure. Therefore, the N-A-S-H gels
(such as alkali-activated class F fly ash, metakaolin, etc.) have more
Fig. 13. Visual appearance the (a) slag, (b) slag: fly ash = 3: 1, (c) slag: fly ash = 1: 1
based geopolymer concrete, and (d) OPC concrete at the end of the ponding test Fig. 14. Corrosion current of steel bar of geopolymer compared to OPC concrete in
3.5% NaCl for 28 days [140]. 0.6 M NaCl solution [149].
12
Table 11
. The chloride resistance tests of geopolymer concrete.
Precursors Activator Chloride Corrosion time Constant voltage Reaction products Resistance compared Ref.
solution to OPC
FA NaOH + Na2SiO3 164 g/l NaCl 720 days – – Better [155]
3.5% NaCl 28 days – – Better [156]
5.0% NaCl 28 days – – Better [76]
GBFS KOH; NaOH; Ca(OH)2 3.0% NaCl 6h 60 V Calcium oxychloride – [45]
NaOH 1 M NaCl 56 days – – Better [139]
3.0% NaCl 710 days – Hydrotalcite Better [150]
NaOH + Na2SiO3 3.0% NaCl 56 days 30 V – Better [146]
165 g/l NaCl 3 months – Hydrotalcite – [157]
Na2SiO3 30% CaCl2 75 days – – Better [151]
NaOH + Na2SiO3 5.0% MgCl2 180 days – – Better [152]
GBFS + MK NaOH + Na2SiO3 3.5% NaCl 45 days 12 V – – [41]
3.0% NaCl 6h – – Better [159]
FA + GBFS Na2SiO3 3.5% NaCl 180 days 30 V – Better [140]
0.6 M NaCl 6h 60 V – Better [149]
3.0% NaCl 90 days 60 V – – [154]
160 g/l NaCl 14 days – – Better [158]
NaOH + Na2SiO3 10% NaCl 91 days 60 V – – [147]
FA + GBFS NaOH + Na2SiO3 36 g/l NaCl 28 days – – – [160]
+RHA
Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; MK is metakaolin; RHA is rice husk ash.
Table 12 fly ash, which may due to either open pore structures or the pres-
. The influence factors of chloride resistance. ence of cracks in fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Hu et al. [147]
also concluded that the volume of pores with the size 10–104nm
Classification of Variable
influence factors have great influence on chloride migration coefficient. For another
thing, several researchers have also thought that the combination
Positive factors Appropriate modulus of water glass (GBFS) [150];
lower water content (FA, GBFS)[158]; higher the of chloride and reaction products (hydrotalcite, strätlingite, etc.)
amount of Na2SiO3 and the concentration of NaOH in the concrete will reduce the content of chloride ions
solutions (FA) [156]; surface hydrophobic modifica- [150,153]. Zhang et al. [141] and Hu et al. [147] considered that
tion (FA, GBFS, RHA) [160]; the slag content in binder the bound chloride of alkali-activated slag/fly ash cement increases
(GBFS, FA) [149]; the addition of nano-SiO2 (FA) [76],
lithium slag particles (GBFS) [162]
significantly with increased water/binder ratio, which might be
Negative factors Coarser the pore structure and the presence of cracks related to the increment of zeolite phases and the higher OH– con-
(FA, GBFS) [140,147,154]; higher water/binder (FA, centration in pore structures. Ma et al. [157] also reported the
GGBS) [141] interaction between reaction products and the accompanying
Others Type of aluminosilicate source materials (GBFS, FA,
sodium can ameliorate chloride binding of geopolymer concrete.
MK, RHA) [23,140–160], activators (GBFS)
[45,147,161]; Na2O concentration (FA, GGBS) [141]; These results provide further scope to prepared geopolymer with
content of alkali (GBFS) [146,157]; high chloride resistance according to Bernal et al. [25].
Where GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; FA is fly ash; MK is metakaolin; RHA is
rice husk ash. 8. Conclusions
porous and worse chloride resistance than C-A-S-H geopolymer The properties of geopolymer concrete have attracted many
type gels (such as alkali-activated slag, etc.). A summary of chloride researcher’s attention due to its excellent properties, environmen-
resistance tests of geopolymer concrete as compared to OPC is tal benefits, and cost-effectiveness. The current paper summarizes
given in Table 11. the durability studies (carbonation resistance, acid corrosion resis-
Table 12 shows the influence factors of chloride resistance tance, sulfate resistance, heat resistance, and chloride resistance),
including the positive factor, negative factor, and others. The types especially influence factors, on geopolymer concrete subjected to
of aluminosilicate source materials, activators, and mix propor- aggressive environments comparison with OPC concrete through
tions may affect the heat resistance of geopolymer concrete. Park 141 recent and past literature. The following conclusions can be
et al. [45] evaluated the chloride resistance of slag concrete acti- drawn:
vated by different activators in 3.0% NaCl solution with 60 V con-
stant voltage for 6 h. The lowest levels of deterioration were d Extensive studies on durability in aggressive environments have
found activated by Ca(OH)2, due to the formation of Ca(ClO)2 to been carried out recently using precursors (generally fly ash,
remove free chlorides. Ravikumar et al. [146] also point out that slag, metakaolin, etc.) activated by different types and concen-
penetration of chloride of slag-based geopolymer concrete acti- trations activators after heating or ambient temperature curing.
vated by KOH and NaOH resembles that in OPC concrete, however, Thus, the variable and composition of geopolymer concrete
Na2SiO3 activated geopolymer shows excellent resistance. The make the mechanism more complex compared to OPC concrete.
geopolymer concrete prepared with additional additives also d In many cases, the durability of geopolymer concrete is better
showed high chloride resistance. Zhang et al. [162] replaced the than OPC concrete. It displays as geopolymer concrete has lower
slag with 30 wt% lithium slag particles, and the chloride ions pen- strength loss and slight erosion in acid, sulfate, and chloride
etration decreased effetely. Cevik et al. [77] added nano-SiO2 into solution, and minor surface cracklings occurred after high-
fly ash-based geopolymer concrete and obtained less damage in temperature exposure. However, geopolymer concrete after
seawater solution, mainly because of the decrease of porosity carbonation has a lower extent of reaction and lower mechani-
and permeability. Thomas et al. [154] found slag-based geopoly- cal properties mainly due to a higher Ca/Si ratio of C-S-H gel of
mer concrete has better chloride ions penetration than activated OPC concrete.
13
d The durability mechanism of geopolymer erosion in various Declaration of Competing Interest

environments is differently influenced by calcium content.
High-calcium alkali-activated systems have similar erosion The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
mechanisms to OPC due to the similarity of hydration products, cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
while the degradation of low-calcium alkali-activated systems to influence the work reported in this paper.
involves the exchange of ions between solution and network
structure and transformation of pore solution subjected to
Acknowledgments
aggressive environments. Thus, the choice of aluminosilicate
source materials has a significant effect on durability.
The authors sincerely thank the financial support from the
d To obtain the highest possible durability properties of geopoly-
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
mer concrete, two main additions can be used: one is filling
51678533), Zhejiang Province Basic Public Welfare Research Pro-
pores to increase compactness (such as the inclusion of various
ject (Grant No. LGG21E080012).
fibers, fine particle, etc.); another is to modify the chemical
composition of concrete (such as the inclusion of nano-scale
components, biological admixture, etc.). Besides, appropriate References
modulus and content of activators, efficient preparation meth-
[1] P.J.M. Monteiro, S.A. Miller, A. Horvath, Towards sustainable concrete, Nat.
ods, and multicomponent mixtures blend may have a positive Mater. 16 (7) (2017) 698–699.
influence on durability. [2] P.K. Mehta, Development, High-performance, high-volume fly ash concrete:
materials, mixture proportioning, properties, construction practice, and case
histories, Suppementary Cementing Materials for Sustainable Development,
2002.
[3] S.T. Yildirim, C. Meyer, S. Herfellner, Effects of internal curing on the strength,
9. Future challenges and opportunities drying shrinkage and freeze-thaw resistance of concrete containing recycled
concrete aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 91 (2015) 288–296.
[4] N.A. Madlool, R. Saidur, M.S. Hossain, N.A. Rahim, A critical review on energy
Although many researches have been done, there are still use and savings in the cement industries, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (4)
have many challenges in geopolymer concrete durability. The (2011) 2042–2060.
performance of geopolymer concrete is significantly governed [5] X. Guo, H. Shi, W.A. Dick, Compressive strength and microstructural
characteristics of class C fly ash geopolymer, Cement Concr. Compos. 32
by the quality of the raw material itself. The diversity physical
(2010) 142–147.
and composition properties of precursors make it difficult to [6] R.M. Andrew, Global CO2 emissions from cement production, Earth Syst. Sci.
form a standardized for every batch received to be used in Data. 10 (1) (2018) 195–217.
[7] C.J. Shi, Z.G. Shi, X. Hu, R. Zhao, L.L. Chong, A review on alkali-aggregate
geopolymer. Popular industry waste precursors (fly ash, slag, rice
reactions in alkali-activated mortars/concretes made with alkali-reactive
husk ash, etc.) have dissimilar particle size distribution and aggregates, Mater. Struct. 48 (3) (2015) 621–628.
chemical composition, and new types of aluminosilicate materi- [8] K.L. Scrivener, V.M. John, E.M. Gartner, Eco-efficient cements: Potential
als (aplite rock [163], glass wastes [111,148], etc.) are also economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement-based materials
industry, Cem. Concr. Res. 114 (2018) 2–26.
emerging. Therefore, require various preparation regime and [9] National Bureau of Statistics, People’s Republic of China, 2019. National report
mixture design to obtain the same performance. For example, on economic and social development in 2020 (in Chinese). http://www.gov.
the mineralogical composition of fly ash is generally influenced cn/xinwen/2020-02/28/content_5484361.htm.
[10] National Bureau of Statistics, People’s Republic of China, 2003. National
by the source of coal and types of electricity generation facility. report on economic and social development in 2002 (in Chinese). http://
Besides, leaching of toxic metals is often troublesome when pre- www.stats.gov.cn/tjgb/ndtjgb/qgndtjgb/t20030228_69102.htm.
cursors are industry waste. [11] Department of Ecology and environment, People’s Republic of China, 2020.
National Report on ecological environment in 2019 (in Chinese). http://www.
Another potential challenge in commercializing geopolymer mee.gov.cn/hjzl/sthjzk/zghjzkgb/.
concrete is the aggressive environments in the field are quite dif- [12] J. Davidovits, Geopolymers, J. Therm. Anal. 37 (1991) 1633–1656.
ferent from the simulated environment in the laboratory and the [13] P. Zhang, K.X. Wang, Q.F. Li, J. Wang, Y.F. Ling, Fabrication and engineering
properties of concretes based on geopolymers/alkali-activated binders - A
research on engineering application of geopolymer concrete is still
review, J. Clean. Prod. 258 (2020). 120896.
in the exploring stage. Besides, recent researches mainly forced on [14] H.Y. Zhang, V. Kodur, B. Wu, L. Cao, F. Wang, Thermal behavior and
short-term durability (generally less than 1 year) rather than long- mechanical properties of geopolymer mortar after exposure to elevated
temperatures, Constr. Build. Mater. 109 (4) (2016) 17–24.
term durability, which ignores the impact of performance degra-
[15] B. Singh, G. Ishwarya, M. Gupta, S.K. Bhattacharyya, Geopolymer concrete: A
dation throughout the life-cycle periods (including construction, review of some recent developments, Constr. Build. Mater. 85 (2015) 78–90.
using, aging stages, etc.). [16] J. Davidovits, Geopolymer Chemistry and Applications, Geopolymer Institute,
The following recommendations for the future study can be Third ed. 2014.
[17] M.M. Al-mashhadani, O. Canpolat, Y. Aygörmez, M. Uysal, S. Erdem,
drawn to facilitate the implementation of geopolymer concrete: Mechanical and microstructural characterization of fiber reinforced fly ash
based geopolymer composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 167 (2018) 505–513.
(1) The mechanisms inducing structural changes in geopolymer [18] T.Y. Xie, P. Visintin, X.Y. Zhao, R. Gravina, Mix design and mechanical
properties of geopolymer and alkali activated concrete: Review of the state-
concrete should be further developed, especially the estab- of-the-art and the development of a new unified approach, Constr. Build.
lishment of an extensive database of chloride diffusion Mater. 256 (2020). 119380.
coefficients. [19] V. Sreevidya, Investigations on the flexural behaviour of ferro geopolymer
composite slabs, 2014.
(2) The influence of minor components of precursors (such as [20] R. Abbas, M.A. Khereby, H.Y. Ghorab, N. Elkhoshkhany, Preparation of
Fe2O3, MgO, etc.), preparation methods, and hybridized geopolymer concrete using Egyptian kaolin clay and the study of its
source materials for durability may be investigated. environmental effects and economic cost, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 22
(4) (2020) 669–687.
(3) A systematic study may be conducted by develop new acti-
[21] A. Hassan, M. Arif, M. Shariq, Use of geopolymer concrete for a cleaner and
vation and curing methods for engineering applications sustainable environment - A review of mechanical properties and
such as solidified after adding water to the solid precursor microstructure, J. Clean. Prod. 223 (2019) 704–728.
[22] X.M. Shi, N. Xie, K. Fortune, J. Gong, Durability of steel reinforced concrete in
directly.
chloride environments: An overview, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 125–
(4) Establish the standardized durability evaluation index and 138.
assess life-cycle periods to better comprehending the effect [23] J.S.J.V. Deventer, R. S. Nicolas, I. Ismail, S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, Microstructure
of aggressive environments on geopolymer concrete. and durability of alkali-activated materials as key parameters for
14
standardization, J. Sustain. Cem-Based Mater. 4(2) (2014) 10.1080/ Alkali Activated Materials. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, 13 (2014),
21650373.2014.979265. Springer, Dordrecht.
[24] C.J. Shi, B. Qu, J.L. Provis, Recent progress in low-carbon binders, Cem. Concr. [56] A.A. Adam, Strength and Durability Properties of Alkali Activated Slag and Fly
Res. 122 (2019) 227–250. Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete, RMIT University Melbourne, Australia,
[25] S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, Durability of alkali- activated materials: progress and 2009, pp. 79–89.
perspectives, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 94 (4) (2014) 997–1008. [57] N. Li, N. Farzadnia, C.J. Shi, Microstructural changes in alkali-activated slag
[26] J.L. Provis, A. Palomo, C.J. Shi, Advances in understanding alkali-activated mortars induced by accelerated carbonation, Cem. Concr. Res. 100 (2017)
materials, Cem. Concr. Res. 78 (2015) 110–125. 214–226.
[27] N. Li, C.J. Shi, Q. Wang, Z.H. Zhang, Z.H. Ou, Composition design and [58] T. Bakharev, J.G. Sanjayan, Y.B. Cheng, Resistance of alkali-activated slag
performance of alkali-activated cements, Mater. Struct. 50 (3) (2017). concrete to carbonation, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (2001) 1277–1283.
[28] M.S. Reddy, P. Dinakar, B.H. Rao, A review of the influence of source material’s [59] Z.G. Shi, C.J. Shi, S. Wan, N. Li, Z.H. Zhang, Effect of alkali dosage and silicate
oxide composition on the compressive strength of geopolymer concrete, modulus on carbonation of alkali-activated slag mortars, Cem. Concr. Res. 113
Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 234 (2016) 12–23. (2018) 55–64.
[29] M.F. Nurruddin, S. Haruna, B.S. Mohammed, I.G. Sha’aban, Methods of curing [60] A. Steffens, Modeling carbonation for corrosion risk prediction of concrete
geopolymer concrete: A review, Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 5 (1) (2018) 31–36. structures, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (2002) 938–941.
[30] M.M.A. Elahi, M.M. Hossain, M.R. Karim, M.F.M. Zain, C. Shearer, A review on [61] F. Puertas, M. Palacios, T. Vazquez, Carbonation process of alkali-activated
alkali-activated binders: Materials composition and fresh properties of slag mortars, J. Mater. Sci. 41 (2006) 3071–3082.
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 260 (2020). 119788. [62] S.A. Bernal, R.M. de Gutierrez, J.L. Provis, V. Rose, Effect of silicate modulus
[31] N. Li, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, H. Wang, Y.W. Liu, A review on mixture design and metakaolin incorporation on the carbonation of alkali silicate-activated
methods for geopolymer concrete, Compos. B. Eng. 178 (2019). 107490. slags, Cem. Concr. Res. 40 (2010) 898–907.
[32] F. Pacheco-Torgal, J. Castro-Gomes, S. Jaliali, Alkali-activated binders: a [63] G.D. Huang, Y.S. Ji, J. Li, Z.H. Hou, C. Jin, Use of slaked lime and Portland
review Part 1. Historical background, terminology, reaction mechanisms and cement to improve the resistance of MSWI bottom ash-GBFS geopolymer
hydration products, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008) 1305–1314. concrete against carbonation, Constr. Build. Mater. 166 (2018) 290–300.
[33] D. Naruphorn, S. Farzad, C. Daniel, pH-Sensitive polymer conjugates for [64] P. Duan, C.J. Yan, W.J. Luo, W. Zhou, Effects of adding nano-TiO2 on
anticorrosion and corrosion sensing, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 10 (12) compressive strength, drying shrinkage, carbonation and microstructure of
(2018) 20876–20883. fluidized bed fly ash based geopolymer paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 106
[34] B.H. Hao, D. Zeng, Q.Y. Deng, Y.X. Concrete reinforcement corrosion (2016) 115–125.
characteristics and grading evaluation under natural conditions, Adv. [65] K. Pasupathy, M. Berndt, J. Sanjayan, P. Rajeev, D.S. Cheema, Durability
Mater. Res. 1030-1032 (2014) 744-749. performance of precast fly ash-based geopolymer concrete under
[35] V. Marcos-Meson, G. Fischer, C. Edvardsen, T.L. Skovhus, A. Michel, Durability atmospheric exposure conditions, J. Mater. Civil. Eng. 30 (3) (2018), https://
of Steel Fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC) exposed to acid attack - A literature doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002165.
review, Constr. Build. Mater. 200 (2019) 490–501. [66] K. Behfarnia, M. Rostami, An assessment on parameters affecting the
[36] D. Bondar, C.J. Lynsdale, N.B. Milestone, N. Hassani, Sulfate resistance of alkali carbonation of alkali-activated slag concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 157 (2017) 1–9.
activated pozzolans, Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 9 (2015) 145–158. [67] J. Zhang, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, Effect of Na2O concentration and water/binder
[37] S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, B. Walkley, R.S. Nicolas, J.D. Gehman, D.G. Brice, A.R. ratio on carbonation of alkali-activated slag/fly ash cements, Constr. Build.
Kilcullen, P. Duxson, J.S.J. van Deventer, Gel nanostructure in alkali-activated Mater. 121258 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121258.
binders based on slag and fly ash, and effects of accelerated carbonation, Cem. [68] S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, R. Mejía de Gutiérrez, J.S.J. van Deventer, Accelerated
Concr. Res. 53 (2013) 127–144. carbonation testing of alkali-activated slag/metakaolin blended concretes:
[38] M.A.M. Ariffin, M.A.R. Bhutta, M.W. Hussin, M. Mohd Tahir, N. Aziah, Sulfuric effect of exposure conditions, Mater. Struct. 48 (3) (2014) 653–669.
acid resistance of blended ash geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 43 [69] J. Zhang, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, Carbonation induced phase evolution in alkali-
(2013) 80–86. activated slag/fly ash cements: The effect of silicate modulus of activators,
[39] H.A. El-Sayed, E.E.S. Abo, H.M. Khater, S.A. Hasanein, Resistance of alkali- Constr. Build. Mater. 223 (2019) 566–582.
activated water-cooled slag geopolymer to sulphate attack, Ceram. Sili. 55 [70] Y.F. Fan, Z.Q. Hu, Y.Z. Zhang, J.L. Liu, Deterioration of compressive property of
(2011) 153–160. concrete under simulated acid rain environment, Constr. Build. Mater. 24
[40] A. Fernandez-Jimenez, J.Y. Pastor, A. Martin, A. Palomo, High-temperature (2010) 1975–1983.
resistance in alkali-activated cement, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 93 (10) (2010) 3411– [71] I. Fernandes, M. Pericao, P. Hagelia, F. Noronha, M.A. Ribeiro, J. Maia,
3417. Identification of acid attack on concrete of a sewage system, Mater. Struct. 45
[41] S.A. Bernal, R.M. de Gutierrez, J.L. Provis, Engineering and durability (3) (2012) 337–350.
properties of concretes based on alkali-activated granulated blast furnace [72] T. Bakharev, G. Sanjayan, Y.B. Cheng, Resistance of alkali-activated slag
slag/metakaolin blends, Constr. Build. Mater. 33 (2012) 99–108. concrete to acid attack, Cem. Concr. Res. 33 (2003) 1607–1611.
[42] B. Prabu, A. Shalini, J.K. Kumar, Rice husk ash based geopolymer concrete—A [73] A. Fernandez-Jimenez, I. Garcia-Lodeiro, A. Palomo, Durability of alkali-
review, Chem. Sci. Rev. Lett. 3 (2014) 288–294. activated fly ash cementitious materials, J Mater Sci 42 (2007) 3055–3065.
[43] M.S.H. Khan, A. Noushini, A. Castel, Carbonation of a low-calcium fly ash [74] M. Vafaei, A. Allahverdi, P. Dong, N. Bassim, Durability performance of
geopolymer concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 69 (1) (2017) 24–34. geopolymer cement based on fly ash and calcium aluminate cement in mild
[44] R.Y. Nkwaju, J.N.Y. Djobo, J.N.F. Huisken, J.G.N. Dentou, L. Courard, Iron-rich concentration acid solutions, J. Sustain. Cem-Based Mater. 8 (5) (2019) 290–
laterite-bagasse fibers based geopolymer composite: Mechanical, durability 308.
and insulating properties, Appl. Clay Sci. 183 (2019). 105333. [75] J. R. Zheng, L. N. Liu, L. X. Xie. Properties of the mortar and concrete of alkali-
[45] J.W. Park, K.Y. Ann, C.G. Cho, Resistance of alkali-activated slag concrete to activated fly-ash cementing materials, Con. 5 (2009) 77-79. Chinese.
chloride-induced corrosion, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2015 (2015) 1–7. [76] GB 50212–2002, Specification for construction and acceptance of
[46] B.M. Fernandez, S.J.R. Simons, C.D. Hills, P.J. Carey, A review of accelerated anticorrosive engineering of buildings, PRC, China.
carbonation technology in the treatment of cement-based materials and [77] A. Cevik, R. Alzeebaree, G. Humur, A. Nis, M.E. Gulsan, Effect of nano-silica on
sequestration of CO2, J. Hazard. Mater. 112 (3) (2004) 193–205. the chemical durability and mechanical performance of fly ash based
[47] T. Bakharev, Resistance of geopolymer materials to acid attack, Cem. Concr. geopolymer concrete, Ceram. Int. 44 (11) (2018) 12253–12264.
Res. 35 (2005) 658–670. [78] S. Thokchom, Fly ash geopolymer pastes in sulphuric acid, Int. J. Eng. Innov.
[48] F. Türker, F. Aköz, S. Koral, N. Yüzer, Effects of magnesium sulfate Res. 3 (6) (2014) 943–947.
concentration on the sulfate resistance of mortars with and without silica [79] A. Mehta, R. Siddique, Sulfuric acid resistance of fly ash based geopolymer
fume, Cem. Concr. Res. 27 (1997) 205–214. concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 146 (2017) 136–143.
[49] R. Liu, L. Jiang, J. Xu, C. Xiong, Z. Song, Influence of carbonation on chloride- [80] P.T. Fernando, J. Said, Resistance to acid attack, abrasion and leaching
induced reinforcement corrosion in simulated concrete pore solutions, behavior of alkali-activated mine waste binders, Mater. Struct. 44 (2) (2011)
Constr. Build. Mater. 56 (2014) 16–20. 487–498.
[50] S. Monkman, P.A. Kenward, G. Dipple, M. Macdonald, M. Raudsepp, Activation [81] M. Malviya, H.S. Goliya, Durability of fly ash based geopolymer concrete using
of cement hydration with carbon dioxide, J. Sustain. Cem-Based Mater. 7 (3) alkaline solutions (NaOH and Na2SiO3), Int. J. Emerg. Tren Eng. Dev. 4 (2014)
(2018) 160–181. 18–33.
[51] H.L. Ye, A. Radlinska, Carbonation-induced volume change in alkali-activated [82] S. Thokchom, P. Ghosh, S. Ghosh, Effect of water absorption, porosity and
slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 144 (2017) 635–644. sorptivity on durability of geopolymer mortars, ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 4
[52] S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, D.G. Brice, A. Kilcullen, P. Duxson, J.S.J. van Deventer, (2009) 28–32.
Accelerated carbonation testing of alkali-activated binders significantly [83] K.T. Nguyen, Y.H. Lee, J. Lee, N. Ahn, Acid resistance and curing properties for
underestimates service life: the role of pore solution chemistry, Cem. green fly ash-geopolymer concrete, J. Asian Archit. Build. 12 (2) (2013) 317–
Concr. Res. 42 (10) (2012) 1317–1326. 322.
[53] C.F. Chang, J.W. Chen, The experimental investigation of concrete carbonation [84] Y.Y. Kim, B.J. Lee, V. Saraswathy, S.J. Kwon. Strength and durability
depth, Cem. Concr. Res. 36 (2006) 1760–1767. performance of alkali-activated rice husk ash geopolymer mortar Scient WJ
[54] Z.G. Li, S. Li, Carbonation resistance of fly ash and blast furnace slag based 2014 [Article ID 209584].
geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 163 (2018) 668–680. [85] P. Duan, C.J. Yan, W. Zhou, W.J. Luo, C.H. Shen, An investigation of the
[55] S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, A. Fernández-Jiménez, P.V. Krivenko, E. Kavalerova, M. microstructure and durability of a fluidized bed fly ash-metakaolin
Palacios, C.J. Shi, Binder chemistry – high-calcium alkali-activated materials, geopolymer after heat and acid exposure, Mater. Des. 74 (2015) 125–137.
15
[86] M. Zhang, M.X. Zhao, G.P. Zhang, D. Mann, K. Lumsden, M.J. Tao, Durability of [117] J.T. Gourley, G.B. Johnson, Developments in Geopolymer Precast Concrete, in:
red mud-fly ash based geopolymer and leaching behavior of heavy metals in J. Davidovits (Ed.), World congress geopolymer, Geopolymer Institute, Saint
sulfuric acid solutions and deionized water, Constr. Build. Mater. 124 (2016) Quentin, France, 2005, pp. 139–143.
373–382. [118] H.Y. Zhang, V. Kodur, L. Cao, S.L. Qi, Fiber reinforced geopolymers for fire
[87] M.T. Jin, F. Lian, R.Q. Xia, Z.H. Wang, Formulation and durability of a resistance applications, in: H. Yao (Ed.), In proceedings of international
geopolymer based on metakaolin/tannery sludge, Waste Manage. 79 (2018) conference on performance-based fire and fire protection engineering
717–728. (ICPFFPE 2013), China, 2013.
[88] M. Rajak, B. Rai, Effect of micro polypropylene fiber on the performance of fly [119] A. Fernandez-Jimenez, A. Palomo, C. Lopez-Hombrados, Some engineering
ash-based geopolymer concrete, J. Appl. Eng. Sci. 9 (1) (2019) 97–108. properties of alkali activated fly ash concrete, ACI Mater. J. 103 (2) (2006)
[89] B. Wei, H. Cao, S. Song, Tensile behavior contrast of basalt and glass fibers 106–112.
after chemical treatment, Mater. Des. 31 (9) (2010) 4244–4250. [120] Y. Xu, Y.L. Wong, C.S. Poon, M. Anson, Impact of high temperature on PFA
[90] A. Karthik, K. Sudalaimani, C.T. Vijayakumar, Durability study on coal fly ash- concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (2001) 1065–1073.
blast furnace slag geopolymer concretes with bio-additives, Ceram. Int. 43 [121] S.A. Bernal, E.D. Rodriguez, R.M. de Gutierrez, M. Gordillo, L.J. Provis,
(15) (2017) 11935–11943. Mechanical and thermal characterisation of geopolymers based on
[91] F.N. Degirmenci, Effect of sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide ratios on silicate-activated metakaolin/slag blends, J. Mater. Sci. 46 (16) (2011)
durability of geopolymer mortars containing natural and artificial pozzolans, 5477–5486.
Ceram. Silik. 61 (4) (2017) 340–350. [122] J. Temuujin, W. Rickard, M. Lee, A. van Riessen, Preparation and thermal
[92] P. Chindaprasirt, U. Rattanasak, S. Taebuanhuad, Resistance to acid and properties of fire resistant metakaolin-based geopolymer-type coatings, J.
sulfate solutions of microwave-assisted high calcium fly ash geopolymer, Non-Cryst. Solids 357 (5) (2011) 1399–1404.
Mater. Struct. 46 (3) (2013) 375–381. [123] D.S. Perera, R.L. Trautman, Geopolymers with the potential for use as
[93] A.E. Idiart, Coupled Analysis of Degradation Processes in Concrete Specimens refractory castables, Adv. Technol. Mater. Process 7 (2) (2005) 187–190.
at the Meso-Level, Universitat Politècnica De Catalunya, Spain, 2009. [124] P.K. Sarker, S. Kelly, Z.T. Yao, Effect of fire exposure on cracking, spalling and
[94] H.F.W. Taylor, R.S. Gollop, Some Chemical and Microstructural Aspects of residual strength of fly ash geopolymer concrete, Mater. Des. 63 (2014) 584–
Concrete Durability, Mechanisms of Chemical Degradation of Cement-Based 592.
Systems, E & FN Spon, London, 1997, pp. 177–184. [125] J.Y. Ye, W.S. Zhang, D. Shi, Performance evolutions of tailing-slag-based
[95] E. Ganjian, H.S. Pouya, Effect of magnesium and sulfate ions on durability of geopolymer under severe conditions, J. Sustain. Cem-Based Mater. 4 (2)
silica fume blended mixes exposed to the seawater tidal zone, Cem. Concr. (2015) 101–115.
Res. 35 (2005) 1332–1343. [126] D.L. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, Damage behavior of geopolymer composites exposed
[96] A.G. Wang, Y. Zheng, Z.H. Zhang, K.W. Zhang, K.W. Liu, Y. Li, L. Shi, D.S. Sun, to elevated temperatures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 30 (2008) 986–991.
The durability of alkali-activated materials in comparison with ordinary [127] P. Duxson, G.C. Lukey, J.S.J. van Deventer, The thermal evolution of
Portland cements and concretes: A review, Engineering 6 (6) (2020) 695–706. metakaolin geopolymers: Part 2–Phase stability and structural
[97] H.E. Elyamany, A.M. Abd Elmoaty, A.M. Elshaboury, Magnesium sulfate development, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 353 (22) (2007) 2186–2200.
resistance of geopolymer mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 184 (2018) 111–127. [128] W.D.A. Rickard, A. van Riessen, P. Walls, Thermal character of geopolymers
[98] W.G.V. Saavedra, D.E. Angulo, R. Mejía de Gutiérrez, Fly ash slag geopolymer synthesized from class F fly ash containing high concentrations of iron and
concrete: resistance to sodium and magnesium sulfate attack, J. Mater. Civ. alpha-quartz, Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 7 (1) (2010) 81–88.
Eng. 28 (12) (2016) 04016148. [129] R. Zhao, J.G. Sanjayan, Geopolymer and Portland cement concretes in
[99] M.T. Jin, Y. Chen, H.L. Dong. Research on sulfate attack resistance of the simulated fire, Mag. Concr. Res. 63 (3) (2011) 163–173.
geopolymer solidification MSWI fly ash. J. Zhejiang Univ. Technol. 41(6) [130] D. Vaiciukyniene, D. Nizeviciene, A. Kiele, E. Janavicius, D. Pupeikis, Effect of
(2013) 596-600. Chinese. phosphogypsum on the stability upon firing treatment of alkali-activated
[100] E. Rodríguez, S. Bernal, R.M.d. Gutiérrez, F. Puertas, Alternative concrete slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 184 (2018) 485–491.
based on alkali-activated slag, Mater. Constr. 58 (291) (2008) 53-67. [131] C. Giosue, A. Mobili, C. Di Perna, F. Tittarelli, Performance of lightweight
[101] H.A. Alcamand, P.H.R. Borges, F.A. Silva, A.C.C. Trindade, The effect of matrix cement-based and alkali-activated mortars exposed to high-temperature,
composition and calcium content on the sulfate durability of metakaolin and Constr. Build. Mater. 220 (2019) 565–576.
metakaolin/slag alkali-activated mortars, Ceram. Int. 44 (5) (2018) 5037– [132] D.L.Y. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, K. Sagoe-Crentsil, Factors affecting the
5044. performance of metakaolin geopolymers exposed to elevated temperatures,
[102] P. Duan, C.J. Yan, W. Zhou, Influence of partial replacement of fly ash by J. Mater. Sci. 43 (2008) 824–831.
metakaolin on mechanical properties and microstructure of fly ash [133] I. Turkmen, M.B. Karakoc, F. Kantarci, M.M. Maras, R. Demirboga, Fire
geopolymer paste exposed to sulfate attack, Ceram. Int. 42 (2) (2016) resistance of geopolymer concrete produced from Elaz ferrochrome slag, Fire
3504–3517. Mater. 233 (4) (2019) 721–733.
[103] L. Guo, Y.Y. Wu, F. Xu, X.T. Song, J.Y. Ye, P. Duan, Z.H. Zhang, Sulfate resistance [134] P. Chindaprasirt, P.D. Silva, S. Hanjitsuwan, Effect of high-speed mixing on
of hybrid fiber reinforced metakaolin geopolymer composites, Compos. B. properties of high calcium fly ash geopolymer paste, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39
Eng. 183 (2020). 107689. (2014) 6001–6007.
[104] C.J. Shi, P.V. Krivenko, D.M. Roy, Alkali-Activated Cements and Concretes, [135] B.H. Hao, D. Zeng, Q.Y. Deng, X.Y. Song, Concrete reinforcement corrosion
Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, UK, 2006. characteristics and grading evaluation under natural conditions, Adv. Mater.
[105] B.A. Salami, M.A. Megat Johari, Z.A. Ahmad, M. Maslehuddin, Durability Res. 38 (6) (2014) 744–749.
performance of palm oil fuel ash-based engineered alkaline-activated [136] Y.S. Choi, J.G. Kim, K.M. Lee, Corrosion behavior of steel bar embedded in fly
cementitious composite (POFA-EACC) mortar in sulfate environment, ash concrete, Corros. Sci. 48 (2006) 1733–1745.
Constr. Build. Mater. 131 (2017) 229–244. [137] A. Noushini, A. Castel, J. Aldred, A. Rawal, Chloride diffusion resistance and
[106] E. Douglas, A. Bilodeau, V.M. Malhotra, Properties and durability of alkali- chloride binding capacity of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Cem. Concr.
activated slag concrete, ACI Mater. J. 89 (1992). Compos. 105 (2020). 103290.
[107] B.M. Mithun, M.C. Narasimhan, Performance of alkali activated slag concrete [138] Q. Yuan, C.J. Shi, G.D. Schutter, K. Audenaert, D.H. Deng, Chloride binding of
mixes incorporating copper slag as fine aggregate, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) cement-based materials subjected to external chloride environment – A
837–844. review, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (1) (2009) 1–13.
[108] I. Ismail, S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, S. Hamdan, J.S.J. van Deventer, Microstructural [139] W.J. Della, M. Roy, M.R. Silsbee, Chloride diffusion in ordinary, blended, and
changes in alkali activated fly ash/slag geopolymers with sulfate exposure, alkali-activated cement pastes and its relation to other properties, Cem.
Mater. Struct. 46 (3) (2013) 361–373. Concr. Res. 30 (2000) 1879–1884.
[109] D. Dzunuzovic, M. Komljenovic, V. Nikolic, T. Ivanovic, External sulfate attack [140] I. Ismail, S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, R. San Nicolas, D.G. Brice, A.R. Kilcullen, S.
on alkali-activated fly ash-blast furnace slag composite, Constr. Build. Mater. Hamdan, J.S.J. van Deventer, Influence of fly ash on the water and chloride
157 (2017) 737–747. permeability of alkali-activated slag mortars and concretes, Constr. Build.
[110] C. Chotetanorm, P. Chindaprasirt, V. Sata, S. Rukzon, A. Sathonsaowaphak, Mater. 48 (2013) 1187-1201.
High-calcium bottom ash geopolymer: sorptivity, pore Size, and resistance to [141] J. Zhang, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, Chloride binding of alkali-activated slag/fly ash
sodium sulfate attack, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 25 (1) (2013) 105–111. cements, Constr. Build. Mater. 226 (2019) 21–31.
[111] Y.W. Liu, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, N. Li, An overview on the reuse of waste glasses [142] X.Y. Ke, S.A. Bernal, O.H. Hussein, J.L. Provis, Chloride binding and mobility in
in alkali-activated materials, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 144 (2019) 297–309. sodium carbonate-activated slag pastes and mortars, Mater. Struct. 50 (6)
[112] M. Hu, X. Zhu, F. Long, Alkali-activated fly ash-based geopolymers with zeolite (2017).
or bentonite as additives, Cem. Concr. Compos. 31 (10) (2009) 762–768. [143] C. Shi, Strength pore structure and permeability of alkali activated slag
[113] A. Özodabas, K. Yilmaz, Improvement of the performance of alkali activated mortars, Cem. Concr. Res. 26 (12) (1996) 1789–1799.
blast furnace slag mortars with very finely ground pumice, Constr. Build. [144] C.J. Shi, L.Y. Zhang, J. Zhang, N. Li, Z.H. Ou, Advances in testing methods and
Mater. 48 (2013) 26–34. influencing factors of chloride ion transport properties of alkali-activated
[114] Fire Brigade of Police Bureau, People’s Republic of China, 2020. Fire Statistical materials, Mater. Rev. 31(15) (2017) 95-100, Chinese.
Yearbook of China in 2018 (in Chinese). [145] L. Tang, L.O. Nilsson Rapid determination of the chloride diffusivity in
[115] H.S. Gokce, High temperature resistance of boron active belite cement concrete by applying an electrical field, Am. J. Geriatric Psychiatry, 10(1)
mortars containing fly ash, J. Clean. Prod. 211 (2019) 992–1000. (1992) 24.
[116] B.W. Xu, H.Y. Ma, C.L. Hu, S.Q. Yang, Z.J. Li, Influence of curing regimes on [146] D. Ravikumar, N. Neithalath, Electrically induced chloride ion transport in
mechanical properties of magnesium oxychloride cement-based composites, alkali activated slag concretes and the influence of microstructure, Cem.
Constr. Build. Mater. 102 (2016) 613–619. Concr. Res. 47 (5) (2013) 31–42.
16
[147] X. Hu, C.J. Shi, Z.G. Shi, L.Y. Zhang, Compressive strength, pore structure and [156] F.U.A. Shaikh, Effects of alkali solutions on corrosion durability of geopolymer
chloride transport properties of alkali-activated slag/fly ash mortars, Cem. concrete, Adv. Concr. Constr. 2 (2) (2014) 109–123.
Concr. Compos. 104 (2019). 103392. [157] Q.M. Ma, S.V. Nanukuttan, P.A.M. Basheer, Y. Bai, C.H. Yang, Chloride
[148] J. Zhang, C.J. Shi, Z.H. Zhang, Z.H. Qu, Durability of alkali-activated materials transport and the resulting corrosion of steel bars in alkali activated slag
in aggressive environments: A review on recent studies, Constr. Build. Mater. concretes, Mater. Struct. 49 (9) (2015) 1–15.
152 (2017) 598–613. [158] H.J. Zhu, Z.H. Zhang, Y.C. Zhu, L. Tian, Durability of alkali-activated fly ash
[149] C. Tennakoon, A. Shayan, J.G. Sanjayan, A. Xu, Chloride ingress and steel concrete: Chloride penetration in pastes and mortars, Constr. Build. Mater. 65
corrosion in geopolymer concrete based on long term tests, Mater. Des. 116 (2014) 51–59.
(2017) 287–299. [159] Q. Wang, J. Da, C.B. Zhang, Z.Y. Ding, Z.T. Sui, Effects of compositions on the
[150] O. Kayyali, M.S.H. Khan, M.S. Ahmed, The role of hydrotalcite in chloride chloride ion permeability of geopolymer concrete, in: J. J. Zheng (Ed.), In
binding and corrosion protection in concretes with ground granulated blast proceeding of 2nd international conference on structures and building
furnace slag, Cem. Concr. Compos. 34 (8) (2012) 936–945. materials (ICSBM), China, 2012.
[151] C.J. Shi, Corrosion resistance of alkali-activated slag cement, Adv. Cem. Res. [160] L.X. Song, L. Zhen, P. Duan, M. Huang, X.F. Hao, Y.S. Yu, Novel low cost and
15 (2003) 77–81. durable rapid-repair material derived from industrial and agricultural by-
[152] M. Heikal, M.Y. Nassar, G. El-Sayed, S.M. Ibrahim, Physico-chemical, products, Ceram. Int. 43 (15) (2017) 11935–11943.
mechanical, microstructure and durability characteristics of alkali activated [161] D. Ravikumar, N. Neithalath, An electrical impedance investigation into the
Egyptian slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 69 (2014) 60–72. chloride ion transport resistance of alkali silicate powder activated slag
[153] J.J. Shi, C.H. Deng, Y.M. Zhang, Early corrosion behavior of rebars embedded in concretes, Cem. Concr. Compos. 44 (2013) 58–68.
the alkali-activated slag mortar, J. Build. Mater. 19 (6) (2016) 969–975. [162] L.F. Zhang, J.X. Chen, S.W. Li, Examination study of alkali-activated slag-
[154] R.J. Thomas, E. Ariyachandra, D. Lezama, S. Peethamparan, Comparison of lithium slag concrete. J. Build. Mater. 9(4) (2006) 488-492, Chinese.
chloride permeability methods for alkali-activated concrete, Constr. Build. [163] M. Khalifeh, J. Todorovic, T. Vrålstad, A. Saasen, H. Hodne, Long-term
Mater. 165 (2018) 104–111. durability of rock-based geopolymers aged at downhole conditions for oil
[155] T. J. F. Škvára, L. Kopecký, Geopolymer materials based on fly ash, Ceram. well cementing operations, J. Sustain. Cem-Based Mater. 6 (4) (2016) 1–14.
Silik. 49 (3) (2005) 195-204.
17

Chen 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chen 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chen 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction and Building Materials 279 (2021) 122496

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

Geopolymer concrete durability subjected to aggressive environments –

Fig. 1. SiO2-Al2O3 + Fe2O3-CaO ternary diagram of aluminosilicate precursors.

Fig. 2. Interdependence of factors influencing geopolymerization reaction under normal conditions.

Fig. 3. The general damage mechanism of cement/geopolymer concrete.

between geopolymer concrete (GPC) and ordinary Portland cement

The carbonation is harmful to concrete structures, which

Precursors Activator CO2 Exposure Reaction products Resistance Ref.

Classification of influence Variable

Where FA is fly ash; GBFS is granulated blast furnace slag; MK is metakaolin.

Precursors Activator Acid solution Corrosion Reaction Resistance compared Ref.

Table 6 unreacted binder particles (Fig. 9a). Formation of gypsum crystals

hybrid fibers improve sulfate resistance resulted in the relief of

In 2018, the number of building fires accounted for more than

Table 8 preparation method. Fernandez-Jimenez et al. [119] reported

Table 10 minosilicate source materials, activator, heating temperature, and

d The durability mechanism of geopolymer erosion in various Declaration of Competing Interest

You might also like