GEOPOLYMERS BASED ON ALUMINOSILICATE RAW MATERIALS: MECHANISMS, RAW MATERIAL SOURCES AND APPLICATION PROSPECTS

The paper discusses current trends in the development of geopolymer composites as an environmentally sustainable alternative to Portland cement. An analysis of raw material sources for geopolymerization is presented, including natural aluminosilicate materials and industrial by-products such as fly ash, blast furnace and ferroalloy slags, red mud, and other residues from energy and metallurgical industries. The main stages and mechanisms of geopolymerization are described, as well as the influence of alkaline activators and synthesis parameters on the formation of the structure and properties of the materials. It is shown that geopolymer composites exhibit high strength, thermal stability, and chemical resistance with a significantly lower carbon footprint, making them promising for use in construction and industrial waste recycling.
It is noted that the Republic of Kazakhstan possesses substantial reserves of both natural aluminosilicate rocks and secondary technogenic resources, which creates favorable conditions for the widespread implementation of geopolymer technologies aimed at reducing environmental impact and improving the efficiency of mineral resource utilization.

1. О внесении изменений и дополнений в Постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан от 30 октября 2010 года № 1144 «Об утверждении Программы по развитию горно-металлургической отрасли в Республике Казахстан на 2010-2014 годы».

2. Chemical fundamentals of geopolymers in sustainable construction / М. Makungu et al // Materials Today Sustainability. – 2024. – Vol. 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtsust.2024.100842.

3. Geopolymers: The green alternative to traditional materials for engineering applications / Z. Jwaidat et al // Infrastructures. – 2023. – № 8. – Р. 98.

4. Tayeh B.A. The utilization of recycled aggregate in high performance concrete: A review / B.A. Tayeh, D.M. Al Saffar, R. Alyousef // Journal of Materials Research and Technology. – 2020. – № 9. – Р. 8469-8481.

5. Geopolymer concrete as sustainable material: A state-of-the-art review / F. Farooq et al // Construction and Building Materials. – 2021. – № 306. – Р. 124762.

6. Sustainable Geopolymer Tuff Composites Utilizing Iron Powder Waste: Rheological and Mechanical Performance Evaluation / M.L.K. Khouadjia et al // Sustainability. – 2025. – № 17. – Р. 1240. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su17031240.

7. Review: geopolymers for fire protection applications / R. Mohamed et al // J Mater Sci. – 2025. – № 60. – Р. 18678-18709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-025-11496-z.

8. Geopolymer Materials: Cutting-Edge Solutions for Sustainable Design Building / L. Ricciotti et al // Sustainability. – 2025. – № 17. – Р. 7483. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17167483.

9. Ujianto M. Structural Behavior of Precast ConcreteWall Panels Due to Dynamic Load: A Review / M. Ujianto, A.Z. Mohd Ali, M. Solikin // AIP Conf. Proc. – 2019. – № 2114. – Р. 050013.

10. Dimas D.D. Utilization of alumina red mud for synthesis of inorganic polymeric materials / D.D. Dimas, I.P. Giannopoulou, D. Panias // Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. Rev. – 2009. – № 30. – Р. 211-239.

11. Nuaklong P. Properties of metakaolin-high calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete containing recycled aggregate from crushed concrete specimens / P. Nuaklong, V. Sata, P. Chindaprasirt // Constr. Build. Mater. – 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.152.

12. Alomayri T. Experimental study of the microstructural and mechanical properties of geopolymer paste with nano material (Al2O3) / T. Alomayri // J. Build. Eng. – 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100788.

13. Synthesis and characterization of red mud and rice husk ash-based geopolymer composites / J. He et al // Cem. Concr. Compos. – 2013. – № 37. – Р. 108-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.11.010.

14. Olive biomass ash as an alternative activator in geopolymer formation: A study of strength, radiology and leaching behavior / M.M. Alonso et al // Cement and Concrete Composites. – 2019. – Vol. 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.103384.

15. Maaty Al.A. Geopolymer Concrete Performance Utilising Waste Glass: A Review / Al.A. Maaty, M.F. Ghazy, M.G. Eldmarny // Mansoura Engineering Journal. – 2025. – Vol. 50, Iss. 3. https://doi.org/10.58491/2735-4202.3254.

16. Harnessing waste for sustainable construction: Novel synthesizing activators from waste for geopolymer concrete / Murali G. et al // Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. – 2024. – №124. – Р. 103559.

17. Properties and performance of fly ash–based geopolymer as concrete repair material / W.W.A. Zailani et al // In Recent Developments of Geopolymer Materials; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK. – 2025. – Р. 163-179.

18. Shafiq M.U. Applications of geopolymers / M.U. Shafiq, M. Jamil, , Khan, M., 2025. // Sustain. Struct. Mater. 256.

19. Smith, J. Sustainable recycling practices for waste glass in construction materials / J. Smith // J. Sustain. Mater. – 2021. – № 12. – Р. 45e54.

20. Effect of Aluminium Powder on Kaolin-Based Geopolymer Characteristic and Removal of Cu2+ / N. Ariffin et al // Materials. – 2021. – № 14. – Р. 814.

21. Assessment of the Suitability of Ceramic Waste in Geopolymer Composites: An Appraisal / I. Luhar et al // Materials. – 2021. – № 14. – Р. 3279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14123279.

22. New Blended Cement from Polishing and Glazing Ceramic Sludge / F. Andreola et al // Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. – 2009. – № 7. – Р. 546-555.

23. Study of Novel Geopolymer Concrete Prepared with Slate Stone Cutting Sludge, Chamotte, Steel Slag and Activated with Olive Stone Bottom Ash / R. Carrillo Beltran et al // Materials. – 2025. – № 18. – Р. 1974. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ma18091974.

24. Geopolymers: An option for the valorization of incinerator bottom ash derived «end of waste» / Lancellotti I. // Ceramics International. – 2015. – Vol. 41, Issue 2, Part A. – P. 2116-2123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.10.008.

25. Madhuchhanda S. Partial replacement of metakaolin with red ceramic waste in geopolymer / S. Madhuchhanda, D. Kausik // Ceramics International. – 2021. – Vol. 47, Issue 3. – P. 3473-3483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.09.191.

26. A review on properties of fresh and hardened geopolymer mortar / P. Zhang et al // Composites B: Engineering. – 2018. – № 152. – Р. 79-95.

27. Pacheco-Torgal F. Properties of tungsten mine waste geopolymeric binder / F. Pacheco-Torgal, J. Castro-Gomes, S. Jalali // Construction and Building Materials. – 2008. – № 22. – Р. 1201-1211.

28. Compressive strength and microstructural analysis of fly ash/palm oil fuel ash based geopolymer mortar under elevated temperatures / N. Ranjbar et al // Construction and Building Materials. – 2014. – № 65. – Р. 114-121.

29. Effects of Si/Al ratio on the structure and properties of metakaolin based geopolymer / P.G. He et al // Ceram. Int. – 2016. – № 42. – Р. 14416-14422.

30. Role of the silica source on the geopolymerization rate / A. Autef et al // J. Non-Cryst. Solids. – 2012. – № 358. – Р. 2886-2893.

31. The composition range of aluminosilicate geopolymers / R.A. Fletcher et al // J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. – 2005. – № 25. – Р. 1471-1477.

32. Optimization of brick waste-based geopolymer binders at ambient temperature and pre-targeted chemical parameters / O. Mahmoodi et al // J. Clean. Prod. – 2020. – № 268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2020.122285.

33. Influence of calcium aluminate cement (CAC) on alkaline activation of red clay brick waste (RCBW) / L. Reig et al // Cement Concr. Compos. – 2016. – № 65. – Р. 177-185.

34. Properties and microstructure of alkali-activated red clay brick waste / L. Reig et al // Construct. Build. Mater. – 2013. – № 43. – Р. 98-106.

35. Application of waste brick powder in alkali activated aluminosilicates: functional and environmental aspects / J. Fort et al // J. Clean. Prod. – 2018. – № 194. – Р. 714-725.

36. Development of high-strength alkali-activated pastes containing high volumes of waste brick and ceramic powders / C.L. Hwang et al // Construct. Build. Mater. – 2019. – № 218. – Р. 519-528.

37. Rossignol, Feasibility of producing geopolymer binder based on a brick clay mixture / J. Peyne et al // Ceram. Int. – 2017. – № 43. – Р. 9860-9871.

38. US 8 523 998 B2. Process for producing geopolymers / Edgar Gasafi, Katja Dombrowski-Daube. – Publ. – 2013.

39. US 5 342 595 A. Process for obtaining a geopolymericalumino-silicate and products thus obtained / J. Davidovits, M. Davidovics, N. Davidovits. – Publ. – 1994.

40. EP 4 484 398 A1. Geopolymer compositions comprising aluminum sludge and use thereof / A. Da Silva, A. Bem d’Eça Peixinho, F. Mendes Gaspar, T. Siqueira de Almeida Archer de Carvalho. – Publ. 2023.

41. № 20220629 A1. One-part geopolymer composition: patent application / Mahmoud Khalifeh, Mohamed Ahmed Fathy Abdelshafy Omran; applicant: Universitetet i Stavanger. – Publ. 2023.

42. WO 2015/089611 A1. Geopolymer cement produced from recycled glass and method for producing same: international patent application / Sidnei Antonio Pianaro, Gino Capobianco; applicant: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. – Publ. 2015.

43. CN 110759655 B. Industrial-waste-based geopolymer : invention patent / Tian Jun, E Xinrui, Wang Deyong, Qu Tianpeng, Shi Jialun, Xiong Yuandong, Lu Shilei, Zhang Min ; applicant: Suzhou University. – Publ. 2021.

44. Пат. RU 2503617 C2. Фризон Ф., Жуссо Дюбьен К. Способ получения геополимера с регулируемой пористостью, полученный геополимер и различные варианты его применения. Опубл. 2014.

45. EA 040554 B1 Кондратович Ф. Л., Утрата К., Микошек-Оперхальская М. Способ получения геополимера или геополимерного композита. Опубл. 2022.

46. WO 2015/089611 A1. Cimento geopolimérico a partir de vidros reciclados e seu processo de obtenção / R.H. Santos et al – 2015.

47. Radhakrishnan S. Analysis of Ferro-Geopolymer Panels Reinforced with Different Types of Fibres / S. Radhakrishnan, N. Soundarapandian // Struct. Concr. – 2025. – № 26. – Р. 2052-2066.

48. Temuujin J. Preparation and thermal behaviour of potassium aluminosilicate geopolymers / J. Temuujin, A. van Riessen, K.J.D. MacKenzie // J. Non-Cryst. Solids. – 2010. – № 356. – Р. 2023-2027.

49. Garcia-Lodeiro I. Variation in hybrid cements over time / I. Garcia-Lodeiro, A. FernandezJimenez, A. Palomo // Cem. Concr. Res. – 2013 – № 52. – Р. 112-122.

50. Effect of Silicate Modulus and Metakaolin Incorporation on the Carbonation of Alkali SilicateActivated Slags / S.A. Bernal et al // Cem. Concr. Res. – 2010. – № 40. – Р. 898-907.

51. The role of calcium in blended fly ash geopolymers / G.M. Canfield et al // J. Mater. Sci. – 2014. – № 17. – Р. 5922-5933.

52. Influence of Activators on Mechanical Properties of Modified Fly Ash Based Geopolymer Mortars / P. Prochon et al // Materials (Basel). – 2020. – № 13(5). – Р. 1033. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13051033. PMID: 32106414; PMCID: PMC7084247.

53. Exemplification of efficacy of homebrewed sodium silicate solution processed from ecoprocessed pozzolan and palm oil clinker powder in geopolymer mortar / H.A.A.E. Ghanim et al // Construction and Building Materials. – 2025. – Vol. 460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.139825.

54. Effect of natural and artificial silicon additives on the physicomechanical performance of dolomite-based alkaline-activated mortar / M. Kaya et al // Silicon. – 2024. – № 16(1). – Р. 215-230. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12633-023-02677-z.

55. JProvis.L. Alkali-activated materials / J.L. Provis // Cem. Concr. Res. – 2018. – № 114. – Р. 40-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.009.

56. Jaarsveld van J. Effect of the Alkali Metal Activator on the Properties of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymers / J. Jaarsveld van, J. Deventer van // Eng. Chem. Res. – 1999. – № 38. – Р. 3932-3941.

57. Fawer M. Life cycle inventories for the production of sodium silicates / M. Fawer, M. Concannon, W. Rieber // Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. – 1999. – № 4(4). – Р. 207-212. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02979498.

58. Effect of sodium hydroxide concentration on fresh properties and compressive strength of selfcompacting geopolymer concrete / F.A. Memon et al // J. Eng. Sci. Technol. – 2013. – № 8(1). – Р. 44-56.

59. Influence of Alkaline Activator Properties on Corrosion Mechanisms and Durability of Steel Reinforcement in Geopolymer Binders / М. Chira et al // Coatings. – 2025. – № 15. – Р. 734. https://doi.org/10.3390/ coatings15060734.

60. Pacheco-Torgal F. Alkali-activated binders: A review / F. Pacheco-Torgal, J. Castro-Gomes, S. Jalali // Part 2. About materials and binders manufacture. Constr. Build. Mater. – 2008. – № 22. – Р.1315-1322.

61. Effect of Sodium Silicate to Sodium Hydroxide Ratios on Strength and Microstructure of Fly Ash Geopolymer Binder / M.S. Morsy et al // J. Sci. Eng. – 2014. – № 39. – Р. 4333-4339.

62. Effect of Sodium Silicate and Sodium Hydroxide Ratioson Compressive Strength of Ceramic Brick and Metakaolin Waste-Based Geopolymer Binder / М. Statkauskas et al // Materials. – 2025. – № 18. – Р. 4947. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ma18214947.

63. Anburuvel A. The role of activators in geopolymer-based stabilization for road construction: a state-of-the-art review / A. Anburuvel // Multiscale and Multidiscip. Model. Exp. and Des. – 2023. – № 6. – Р. 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-022-00139-4.