journal article·2025-02-17Open access

A systematic review of metakaolin-based alkali-activated and geopolymer concrete: A step toward green concrete

Diyar N. Qader, Ary Shehab Jamil, Alireza Bahrami, Mujahid Ali, Krishna Prakash Arunachalam

Abstract

Abstract Expanding the world’s infrastructure drives up demand for building materials, particularly ordinary Portland cement (OPC) concrete, whose high carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions have a detrimental effect on the environment. To address this issue, researchers looked into employing alternative supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), including metakaolin (MK), which is derived from calcined kaolin clay with pozzolanic properties, to partially or completely replace OPC in concrete. This review article examines the MK’s application in alkali-activated materials (AAMs) and OPC-based concrete. By interacting with calcium hydroxide, MK functions as a pozzolanic additive for OPC concrete, enhancing its mechanical qualities and durability. The use of MK as a source material in AAMs, a newly developed class of sustainable binders, is also covered in this article. The effects of different combinations of MK with additional SCMs, including fly ash (FA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS), silica fume, and rice husk ash, on the characteristics of alkali-activated concrete both in its fresh and hardened states, are compiled. The majority of the articles considered in this study are from the past decade, while some relevant articles from 2014 and earlier are also taken into account. The results showed that adding MK to concrete in combination with FA or GGBFS has excellent synergistic effects on microstructural development, pozzolanic activity, and strength increases. In particular, the MK–FA mix demonstrated the most encouraging performance gains. Because of its large surface area, the use of nano-MK helped achieve a denser geopolymer structure and improve mechanical properties. The best curing temperatures for MK-based geopolymers to gain strength were found to be between 40 and 80°C for a total of 28 days. The review also pointed out that the compressive strength and geopolymerization process of MK-based geopolymers were enhanced by increasing the mass ratio of Na 2 SiO 3 to NaOH and NaOH concentration. Nevertheless, geopolymerization was hampered by unnecessarily high alkali concentrations. Moreover, the compressive strength was increased by partially replacing MK with TiO 2 or GGBFS. The synergistic effects of combining MK with other SCMs to improve concrete performance highlight the potential of MK-based solutions in lowering the environmental footprint of concrete buildings.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Magnesium Oxide Properties and Applications · Building materials and conservation

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Civil Engineering Department, University of Kirkuk , Kirkuk , Iraq

Department of Civil Engineering, Al-Qalam University College , Sulaimani-Kirkuk Road , Kirkuk , Iraq

Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, University of Gävle , 801 76 , Gävle , Sweden

Department of Transport Systems, Traffic Engineering and Logistics, Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, Silesian University of Technology , Krasinskiego Street, 40-019 , Gliwice , Poland

Departamento de Ciencias de la Construcción, Facultad de Ciencias de la Construcción Ordenamiento Territorial, Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana , Santiago , Chile

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. Ali, M., A. Kumar, A. Yvaz, and B. Salah. Central composite design application in the optimization of the effect of pumice stone on lightweight concrete properties using RSM. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 18, 2023, id. e01958.10.1016/j.cscm.2023.e01958 ↗
2. Malhotra, V. and P. Mehta. High-performance, high-volume fly ash concrete. Supplementary Cementing Materials for Sustainable Development Inc, Ottawa, Canada, Vol. 101, 2002.
3. Reddy, B. D., S. A. Jyothy, and F. Shaik. Experimental analysis of the use of coconut shell as coarse aggregate. Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2014, pp. 6–13.10.9790/1684-1060613 ↗
4. Gartner, E. Industrially interesting approaches to “low-CO2” cements. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, No. 9, 2004, pp. 1489–1498.10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.01.021 ↗
5. Scrivener, K. L. and R. J. Kirkpatrick. Innovation in use and research on cementitious material. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 38, No. 2, 2008, pp. 128–136.10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.09.025 ↗
6. Usón, A. A., G. Ferreira, A. M. López-Sabirón, E. L. Sastresa, and A. S. De Guinoa. Characterisation and environmental analysis of sewage sludge as secondary fuel for cement manufacturing. Chemical Engineering Transactions, Vol. 29, 2012, pp. 457–462.
7. Summerbell, D. L., C. Y. Barlow, and J. M. Cullen. Potential reduction of carbon emissions by performance improvement: A cement industry case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 135, 2016, pp. 1327–1339.10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.155 ↗
8. Rashad, A. M. and S. R. Zeedan. The effect of activator concentration on the residual strength of alkali-activated fly ash pastes subjected to thermal load. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 25, No. 7, 2011, pp. 3098–3107.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.12.044 ↗
9. Manjunath, B. T. A. Partial replacement of E-plastic waste as coarse-aggregate in concrete. Procedia Environmental Sciences, Vol. 35, 2016, pp. 731–739.10.1016/j.proenv.2016.07.079 ↗
10. Alani, A. A., R. Lesovik, V. Lesovik, R. Fediuk, S. Klyuev, M. Amran, et al. Demolition waste potential for completely cement-free binders. Materials, Vol. 15, No. 17, 2022, id. 6018.10.3390/ma15176018 ↗
11. Bahoria, B., D. Parbat, and P. Naganaik. Replacement of natural sand in concrete by waste products: A state of art. Journal of Environmental Research and Development, Vol. 7, No. 4A, 2013, id. 1651.
12. Asghar, R., M. A. Khan, R. Alyousef, M. F. Javed, and M. Ali. Promoting the green Construction: Scientometric review on the mechanical and structural performance of geopolymer concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 368, 2023, id. 130502.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130502 ↗
13. Suhendro, B. Toward green concrete for better sustainable environment. Procedia Engineering, Vol. 95, 2014, pp. 305–320.10.1016/j.proeng.2014.12.190 ↗
14. Li, Z., B. Delsaute, T. Lu, A. Kostiuchenko, S. Staquet, and G. Ye. A comparative study on the mechanical properties, autogenous shrinkage and cracking proneness of alkali-activated concrete and ordinary Portland cement concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 292, 2021, id. 123418.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123418 ↗
15. Wang, Y., A. Iqtidar, M. N. Amin, S. Nazar, A. M. Hassan, and M. Ali. Predictive modelling of compressive strength of fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag based geopolymer concrete using machine learning techniques. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 20, 2024, id. e03130.10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03130 ↗
16. Guo, H., B. Zhang, L. Deng, P. Yuan, M. Li, and Q. Wang. Preparation of high-performance silico-aluminophosphate geopolymers using fly ash and metakaolin as raw materials. Applied Clay Science, Vol. 204, 2021, id. 106019.10.1016/j.clay.2021.106019 ↗
17. Xie, J., J. Zhao, J. Wang, C. Fang, B. Yuan, and Y. Wu. Impact behaviour of fly ash and slag-based geopolymeric concrete: The effects of recycled aggregate content, water-binder ratio and curing age. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 331, 2022, id. 127359.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127359 ↗
18. Jayanthi, V., S. Avudaiappan, M. Amran, K. P. Arunachalam, D. N. Qader, M. C. Delgado, et al. Innovative use of micronized biomass silica-GGBS as agro-industrial by-products for the production of a sustainable high-strength geopolymer concrete. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 18, 2023, id. e01782.10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01782 ↗
19. Xie, T., P. Visintin, X. Zhao, and R. Gravina. Mix design and mechanical properties of geopolymer and alkali activated concrete: Review of the state-of-the-art and the development of a new unified approach. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 256, 2020, id. 119380.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119380 ↗
20. da Silva Andrade, D., J. H. da Silva Rêgo, P. C. Morais, A. N. de Mendonça Lopes, and M. F. Rojas. Investigation of CSH in ternary cement pastes containing nanosilica and highly-reactive supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs): Microstructure and strength. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 198, 2019, pp. 445–455.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.10.235 ↗
21. Tironi, A., M. A. Trezza, A. N. Scian, and E. F. Irassar. Assessment of pozzolanic activity of different calcined clays. Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 37, 2013, pp. 319–327.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2013.01.002 ↗
22. Ul Arifeen, S., M. Nasir Amin, W. Ahmad, F. Althoey, M. Ali, B. Saad Alotaibi, et al. A comparative study of prediction models for alkali-activated materials to promote quick and economical adaptability in the building sector. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 407, 2023, id. 133485.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133485 ↗
23. Strunge, T., P. Renforth, and M. Van der Spek. Towards a business case for CO2 mineralisation in the cement industry. Communications Earth & Environment, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2022, id. 59.10.1038/s43247-022-00390-0 ↗
24. Li, L., J. Xie, B. Zhang, Y. Feng, and J. Yang. A state-of-the-art review on the setting behaviours of ground granulated blast furnace slag- and metakaolin-based alkali-activated materials. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 368, 2023, id. 130389.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130389 ↗
25. Chandra Sekhar, M., M. H. Kumar, S. Lova Raju, and I. Saikrishnamacharyulu. Influence of Metakaolin and glass powder on mechanical behaviour of concrete. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2023.10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.713 ↗
26. Mo, Z., R. Wang, and X. Gao. Hydration and mechanical properties of UHPC matrix containing limestone and different levels of metakaolin. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 256, 2020, id. 119454.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119454 ↗
27. Nazer, A., J. Payá, M. V. Borrachero, and J. Monzó. Use of ancient copper slags in Portland cement and alkali activated cement matrices. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 167, 2016, pp. 115–123.10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.11.024 ↗
28. Li, W. and Y. Yi. Use of carbide slag from acetylene industry for activation of ground granulated blast-furnace slag. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 238, 2020, id. 117713.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117713 ↗
29. Zhang, X., B. Wang, and J. Chang. Variation in mineral composition by hydration and carbonation in calcium hydroxide matrix containing zeolite. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 56, 2022, id. 104491.10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104491 ↗
30. Snellings, R., A. Salze, and K. Scrivener. Use of X-ray diffraction to quantify amorphous supplementary cementitious materials in anhydrous and hydrated blended cements. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 64, 2014, pp. 89–98.10.1016/j.cemconres.2014.06.011 ↗
31. Ambroise, J., S. Maximilien, and J. Pera. Properties of metakaolin blended cements. Advanced Cement Based Materials, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1994, pp. 161–168.10.1016/1065-7355(94)90007-8 ↗
32. Dvorkin, L., V. Zhitkovsky, M. Sitarz, and I. Hager. Cement with fly ash and metakaolin blend – drive towards a more sustainable construction. Energies, Vol. 15, No. 10, 2022, id. 3556.10.3390/en15103556 ↗
33. Dadsetan, S. and J. Bai. Mechanical and microstructural properties of self-compacting concrete blended with metakaolin, ground granulated blast-furnace slag and fly ash. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 146, 2017, pp. 658–667.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.158 ↗
34. Ferreira, R. M., J. P. Castro-Gomes, P. Costa, and R. Malheiro. Effect of metakaolin on the chloride ingress properties of concrete. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2016, pp. 1375–1384.10.1007/s12205-015-0131-8 ↗
35. Saboo, N., S. Shivhare, K. K. Kori, and A. K. Chandrappa. Effect of fly ash and metakaolin on pervious concrete properties. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 223, 2019, pp. 322–328.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.06.185 ↗
36. Feng, D., J. L. Provis, and J. S. van Deventer. Thermal activation of albite for the synthesis of one‐part mix geopolymers. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, Vol. 95, No. 2, 2012, pp. 565–572.10.1111/j.1551-2916.2011.04925.x ↗
37. Peng, M. X., Z. H. Wang, Q. G. Xiao, F. Song, W. Xie, L. C. Yu, et al. Effects of alkali on one-part alkali-activated cement synthesized by calcining bentonite with dolomite and Na2CO3. Applied Clay Science, Vol. 139, 2017, pp. 64–71.10.1016/j.clay.2017.01.020 ↗
38. Peng, M. X., Z. H. Wang, S. H. Shen, Q. G. Xiao, L. J. Li, Y. C. Tang, et al. Alkali fusion of bentonite to synthesize one-part geopolymeric cements cured at elevated temperature by comparison with two-part ones. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 130, 2017, pp. 103–112.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.010 ↗
39. Abdel-Gawwad, H. and S. Abo-El-Enein. A novel method to produce dry geopolymer cement powder. HBRC Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2016, pp. 13–24.10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.008 ↗
40. Kim, M. S., Y. Jun, C. Lee, and J. E. Oh. Use of CaO as an activator for producing a price-competitive non-cement structural binder using ground granulated blast furnace slag. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 54, 2013, pp. 208–214.10.1016/j.cemconres.2013.09.011 ↗
41. Yang, K. H., J. K. Song, and J. S. Lee. Properties of alkali-activated mortar and concrete using lightweight aggregates. Materials and Structures, Vol. 43, 2010, pp. 403–416.10.1617/s11527-009-9499-6 ↗
42. Yang, K.-H. and J.-K. Song. Workability loss and compressive strength development of cementless mortars activated by combination of sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2009, pp. 119–127.10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:3(119) ↗
43. Yang, K.-H., J.-K. Song, A. F. Ashour, and E.-T. Lee. Properties of cementless mortars activated by sodium silicate. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 22, No. 9, 2008, pp. 1981–1989.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.07.003 ↗
44. Yang, K.-H., J.-K. Song, K.-S. Lee, and A. F. Ashour. Flow and compressive strength of alkali-activated mortars, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 106, No. 1, 2009, pp. 50–58.10.14359/56316 ↗
45. Nematollahi, B., J. Sanjayan, J. Qiu, and E.-H. Yang. Micromechanics-based investigation of a sustainable ambient temperature cured one-part strain hardening geopolymer composite. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 131, 2017, pp. 552–563.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.117 ↗
46. Nematollahi, B., J. Sanjayan, J. Qiu, and E.-H. Yang. High ductile behavior of a polyethylene fiber-reinforced one-part geopolymer composite: A micromechanics-based investigation. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 17, 2017, pp. 555–563.10.1016/j.acme.2016.12.005 ↗
47. Wang, K. T., L. Q. Du, X. S. Lv, Y. He, and X. M. Cui. Preparation of drying powder inorganic polymer cement based on alkali-activated slag technology. Powder Technology, Vol. 312, 2017, pp. 204–209.10.1016/j.powtec.2017.02.036 ↗
48. Nematollahi, B., J. Sanjayan, and F. U. A. Shaikh. Synthesis of heat and ambient cured one-part geopolymer mixes with different grades of sodium silicate. Ceramics International, Vol. 41, No. 4, 2015, pp. 5696–5704.10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.12.154 ↗
49. Kovtun, M., E. P. Kearsley, and J. Shekhovtsova. Dry powder alkali-activated slag cements. Advances in Cement Research, Vol. 27, No. 8, 2015, pp. 447–456.10.1680/adcr.14.00078 ↗
50. Peys, A., L. Arnout, B. Blanpain, H. Rahier, K. Van Acker, and Y. Pontikes. Mix-design parameters and real-life considerations in the pursuit of lower environmental impact inorganic polymers. Waste and Biomass Valorization, Vol. 9, 2018, pp. 879–889.10.1007/s12649-017-9877-1 ↗
51. Hajimohammadi, A. and J. S. van Deventer. Characterisation of one-part geopolymer binders made from fly ash. Waste and Biomass Valorization, Vol. 8, 2017, pp. 225–233.10.1007/s12649-016-9582-5 ↗
52. Matalkah, F., L. Xu, W. Wu, and P. Soroushian. Mechanochemical synthesis of one-part alkali aluminosilicate hydraulic cement. Materials and Structures, Vol. 50, 2017, pp. 1–12.10.1617/s11527-016-0968-4 ↗
53. Nematollahi, B. and J. Sanjayan, eds., Ambient temperature cured one-part engineered geopolymer composite: a sustainable alternative to engineered cementitious composite. 9th Rilem International Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Concrete, 2016.
54. Suwan, T. and M. Fan. Effect of manufacturing process on the mechanisms and mechanical properties of fly ash-based geopolymer in ambient curing temperature. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 32, No. 5, 2017, pp. 461–467.10.1080/10426914.2016.1198013 ↗
55. Choo, H., S. Lim, W. Lee, and C. Lee. Compressive strength of one-part alkali activated fly ash using red mud as alkali supplier. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 125, 2016, pp. 21–28.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.015 ↗
56. Hajimohammadi, A., J. L. Provis, and J. S. Van Deventer. One-part geopolymer mixes from geothermal silica and sodium aluminate. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 47, No. 23, 2008, pp. 9396–9405.10.1021/ie8006825 ↗
57. Hajimohammadi, A., J. L. Provis, and J. S. Van Deventer. Time-resolved and spatially-resolved infrared spectroscopic observation of seeded nucleation controlling geopolymer gel formation. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, Vol. 357, No. 2, 2011, pp. 384–392.10.1016/j.jcis.2011.02.045 ↗
58. Peys, A., H. Rahier, and Y. Pontikes. Potassium-rich biomass ashes as activators in metakaolin-based inorganic polymers. Applied Clay Science, Vol. 119, 2016, pp. 401–409.10.1016/j.clay.2015.11.003 ↗
59. Peng, M. X., Z. H. Wang, S. H. Shen, and Q. G. Xiao. Synthesis, characterization and mechanisms of one-part geopolymeric cement by calcining low-quality kaolin with alkali. Materials and Structures, Vol. 48, 2015, pp. 699–708.10.1617/s11527-014-0350-3 ↗
60. Koloušek, D., J. Brus, M. Urbanova, J. Andertova, V. Hulinsky, and J. Vorel. Preparation, structure and hydrothermal stability of alternative (sodium silicate-free) geopolymers. Journal of Materials Science, Vol. 42, 2007, pp. 9267–9275.10.1007/s10853-007-1910-5 ↗
61. Hajimohammadi, A., T. Ngo, P. Mendis, T. Nguyen, A. Kashani, and J. S. van Deventer. Pore characteristics in one-part mix geopolymers foamed by H2O2: The impact of mix design. Materials & Design, Vol. 130, 2017, pp. 381–391.10.1016/j.matdes.2017.05.084 ↗
62. Abdollahnejad, Z., C. M. Jesus, F. Pacheco-Torgal, and J. Aguiar. One-part geopolymers versus Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) mortars: Durability assessment, Editora CRV, Braga, Portugal, 2013.
63. Ye, N., Y. Chen, J. Yang, S. Liang, Y. Hu, B. Xiao, et al. Co-disposal of MSWI fly ash and Bayer red mud using an one-part geopolymeric system. Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 318, 2016, pp. 70–78.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.06.042 ↗
64. Ke, X., S. A. Bernal, N. Ye, J. L. Provis, and J. Yang. One‐part geopolymers based on thermally treated red mud/NaOH blends. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, Vol. 98, No. 1, 2015, pp. 5–11.10.1111/jace.13231 ↗
65. Ye, N., J. Yang, S. Liang, Y. Hu, J. Hu, B. Xiao, et al. Synthesis and strength optimization of one-part geopolymer based on red mud. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 111, 2016, pp. 317–325.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.099 ↗
66. Hajimohammadi, A. and J. S. van Deventer. Solid reactant-based geopolymers from rice hull ash and sodium aluminate. Waste and Biomass Valorization, Vol. 8, 2017, pp. 2131–2140.10.1007/s12649-016-9735-6 ↗
67. Sturm, P., G. Gluth, H. Brouwers, and H.-C. Kühne. Synthesizing one-part geopolymers from rice husk ash. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 124, 2016, pp. 961–966.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.017 ↗
68. Gluth, G., C. Lehmann, K. Rübner, and H.-C. Kühne. Geopolymerization of a silica residue from waste treatment of chlorosilane production. Materials and Structures, Vol. 46, 2013, pp. 1291–1298.10.1617/s11527-012-9972-5 ↗
69. Sturm, P., S. Greiser, G. Gluth, C. Jäger, and H. Brouwers. Degree of reaction and phase content of silica-based one-part geopolymers investigated using chemical and NMR spectroscopic methods. Journal of Materials Science, Vol. 50, 2015, pp. 6768–6778.10.1007/s10853-015-9232-5 ↗
70. Sturm, P., G. Gluth, S. Simon, H. Brouwers, and H.-C. Kühne. The effect of heat treatment on the mechanical and structural properties of one-part geopolymer-zeolite composites. Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 635, 2016, pp. 41–58.10.1016/j.tca.2016.04.015 ↗
71. Wan, Q., F. Rao, S. Song, R. E. García, R. M. Estrella, C. L. Patino, et al. Geopolymerization reaction, microstructure and simulation of metakaolin-based geopolymers at extended Si/Al ratios. Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 79, 2017, pp. 45–52.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.01.014 ↗
72. Sabir, B., S. Wild, and J. Bai. Metakaolin and calcined clays as pozzolans for concrete: a review. Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 23, No. 6, 2001, pp. 441–454.10.1016/S0958-9465(00)00092-5 ↗
73. Siddique, R. and M. I. Khan. Supplementary cementing materials, Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Germany, 2011.10.1007/978-3-642-17866-5 ↗
74. Mehta, P. K. and P. Monteiro. Concrete: microstructure, properties, and materials, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 2006.
75. Poon, C. S., L. Lam, and Y. Wong. A study on high strength concrete prepared with large volumes of low calcium fly ash. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2000, pp. 447–455.10.1016/S0008-8846(99)00271-9 ↗
76. Rashad, A. M. Metakaolin as cementitious material: History, scours, production and composition–A comprehensive overview. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 41, 2013, pp. 303–318.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.12.001 ↗
77. Patil, B. and P. Kumbhar. Strength and durability properties of high performance concrete incorporating high reactivity metakaolin. International Journal of Modern Engineering Research, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2012, pp. 1099–1104.
78. Al-Akhras, N. M. Durability of metakaolin concrete to sulfate attack. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 36, No. 9, 2006, pp. 1727–1734.10.1016/j.cemconres.2006.03.026 ↗
79. Tafraoui, A., G. Escadeillas, and T. Vidal. Durability of the ultra high performances concrete containing metakaolin. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 112, 2016, pp. 980–987.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.169 ↗
80. Mindess, S. Developments in the formulation and reinforcement of concrete, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK, 2019.
81. da Luz Prof, C. A. Compressive strength, modulus of elasticity and hardness of geopolymeric cement synthetized from non-calcined natural kaolin. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 280, 2021, id. 124293.10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124293 ↗
82. Nuaklong, P., V. Sata, and P. Chindaprasirt. Properties of metakaolin-high calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete containing recycled aggregate from crushed concrete specimens. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 161, 2018, pp. 365–373.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.152 ↗
83. Adak, D., M. Sarkar, and S. Mandal. Effect of nano-silica on strength and durability of fly ash based geopolymer mortar. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 70, 2014, pp. 453–459.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.093 ↗
84. Kaur, M., J. Singh, and M. Kaur. Microstructure and strength development of fly ash-based geopolymer mortar: Role of nano-metakaolin. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 190, 2018, pp. 672–679.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.157 ↗
85. Raheem, A. A., R. Abdulwahab, and M. A. Kareem. Incorporation of metakaolin and nanosilica in blended cement mortar and concrete-A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 290, 2021, id. 125852.10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125852 ↗
86. Nath, P. and P. K. Sarker. Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and early strength properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in ambient condition. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 66, 2014, pp. 163–171.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.05.080 ↗
87. Amran, M., A. Al-Fakih, S. Chu, R. Fediuk, S. Haruna, A. Azevedo, et al. Long-term durability properties of geopolymer concrete: An in-depth review. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 15, 2021, id. e00661.10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00661 ↗
88. Albidah, A., M. Alghannam, H. Abbas, T. Almusallam, and Y. Al-Salloum. Characteristics of metakaolin-based geopolymer concrete for different mix design parameters. Journal of Materials Research and Technology, Vol. 10, 2021, pp. 84–98.10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.11.104 ↗
89. Gong, W., N. Wang, and N. Zhang. Effect of fly ash and metakaolin on the macroscopic and microscopic characterizations of magnesium oxychloride cement. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 267, 2021, id. 120957.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120957 ↗
90. Parande, A. K., R. Chitradevi, K. Thangavel, M. Karthikeyan, B. Ganesh, and N. Palaniswamy. Metakaolin: a versatile material to enhance the durability of concrete–an overview. Structural Concrete, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2009, pp. 125–138.10.1680/stco.2009.10.3.125 ↗
91. Yaseri, S., G. Hajiaghaei, F. Mohammadi, M. Mahdikhani, and R. Farokhzad. The role of synthesis parameters on the workability, setting and strength properties of binary binder based geopolymer paste. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 157, 2017, pp. 534–545.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.102 ↗
92. Görhan, G., R. Aslaner, and O. Şinik. The effect of curing on the properties of metakaolin and fly ash-based geopolymer paste. Composites, Part B: Engineering, Vol. 97, 2016, pp. 329–335.10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.05.019 ↗
93. Song, W., Z. Zhu, Y. Peng, Y. Wan, X. Xu, S. Pu, et al. Effect of steel slag on fresh, hardened and microstructural properties of high-calcium fly ash based geopolymers at standard curing condition. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 229, 2019, id. 116933.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.116933 ↗
94. Nath, P. and P. K. Sarker. Flexural strength and elastic modulus of ambient-cured blended low-calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 130, 2017, pp. 22–31.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.034 ↗
95. Nasvi, M. M. C., R. P. Gamage, and S. Jay. Geopolymer as well cement and the variation of its mechanical behavior with curing temperature. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2012, pp. 46–58.10.1002/ghg.39 ↗
96. Noushini, A. and A. Castel. The effect of heat-curing on transport properties of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 112, 2016, pp. 464–477.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.210 ↗
97. Álvarez-Ayuso, E., X. Querol, F. Plana, A. Alastuey, N. Moreno, M. Izquierdo, et al. Environmental, physical and structural characterisation of geopolymer matrixes synthesised from coal (co-) combustion fly ashes. Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 154, No. 1–3, 2008, pp. 175–183.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.008 ↗
98. Singh, B., G. Ishwarya, M. Gupta, and S. K. Bhattacharyya. Geopolymer concrete: A review of some recent developments. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 85, 2015, pp. 78–90.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.036 ↗
99. Aydın, S. and B. Baradan. Mechanical and microstructural properties of heat cured alkali-activated slag mortars. Materials & Design, Vol. 35, 2012, pp. 374–383.10.1016/j.matdes.2011.10.005 ↗
100. Rovnaník, P. Effect of curing temperature on the development of hard structure of metakaolin-based geopolymer. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 24, No. 7, 2010, pp. 1176–1183.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.12.023 ↗