Geopolymer composites have been around only for 40 years. Nowadays, they are used in buildings and infrastructures of various kinds. A geopolymer’s main benefit is that it is a green material that is partially made by utilizing waste products. The carbon footprint from geopolymer matrix manufacturing is at least two times less than Portland cement manufacturing. Due to the nature of the geopolymer manufacturing process, there is a high risk of shrinkage that could develop unwanted micro-cracks that could reduce strength and create higher creep strains. Because of this concern, a common strategy to reduce long-term strains of the material, such as shrinkage and creep, is to add fiber reinforcement that would constrain crack development in the material. This article aims to determine how various kinds and amounts of different fiber reinforcement affect fly ash-based geopolymer composites’ creep strains in compression. Specimen mixes were produced with 1% steel fibers, 1% polypropylene fibers, 5% polypropylene fibers, and without fibers (plain geopolymer). For creep and shrinkage testing, cylindrical specimens Ø46 × 190 mm were used. The highest creep resistance was observed in 5% polypropylene fiber specimens, followed by 1% polypropylene fiber, plain, and 1% steel fiber specimens. The highest compressive strength was observed in 1% polypropylene fiber specimens, followed by plain specimens, 1% steel fiber specimens, and 5% polypropylene fiber-reinforced specimens. The only fiber-reinforced geopolymer mix with improved long-term properties was observed with 1% polypropylene fiber inclusion, whereas other fiber-introduced mixes showed significant decreases in long-term properties. The geopolymer composite mix with 1% polypropylene fiber reinforcement showed a reduction in creep strains of 31% compared to the plain geopolymer composite.

In recent decades, geopolymer concrete has often been viewed as an alternative to traditional concrete. Although its comparatively lower production of greenhouse gas emissions during a lifecycle is usually mentioned at the top of the list of benefits, the possibility of using various waste materials in its production is a clear advantage as well. This literature review summarizes and analyses the existing information on the different available construction wastes for the production of geopolymer and foamed geopolymer concrete and analyzes the curing conditions, constituents in the aluminosilicate precursor, mechanical properties, and the activator type. As part of the literature review, the use of autoclaved aerated concrete and brick wastes has been evaluated. Autoclaved concrete has been chosen because it is a typical low-strength, cement-based construction material and demolition waste that is currently disposed of in landfills, making it quite a challenge for direct use as a supplementary cementitious material. On the other hand, brick waste, one of the most common construction wastes, can be feasibly used in the form of brick dust. This literature review uses data from randomly selected studies.

This study investigated the effect of a low amount of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and steel fiber reinforcement on fly ash-based geopolymer composite long-term deflection and its microstructure. For testing purposes, specimens with different amounts and types of fiber reinforcement as well as plain (reference) were prepared. The long-term deflection test was performed by loading specimens with 40% of the ultimate flexural strength. A microstructure analysis was performed using polished section specimens, and images were acquired at 25-times magnification on a scanning electron microscope. The results of the flexural strength test show that all geopolymer composites with fiber reinforcement have lower flexural strength than plain geopolymer composites. The long-term deflection tests show that the highest deflections exhibit 1% PVA fiber-reinforced specimens. The lowest amount of deflection is for 1% steel fiber-reinforced specimens. Specific creep shows similar results to plain, and 1% steel fiber-reinforced specimens, while 1% PVA and 0.5% PVA/0.5% steel fiber-reinforced specimen exhibits the same properties. The quantitative microanalysis of the polished section further confirms the deflection results. Specimens with 1% PVA fiber reinforcement have significantly higher porosity than all other specimens. They are followed by plain specimens and 1% steel fiber, and 0.5% PVA/0.5 steel fiber-reinforced specimens have almost the same porosity level.

Additive manufacturing has recently become popular and more cost-effective for building construction. This study presents a prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) of 3D-printed foamed geopolymer composites (3D-FOAM materials) incorporating construction and demolition waste. The materials were developed using fly ash, slag, sand, and a foaming agent, with recycled clay brick waste (CBW) and autoclaved aerated concrete waste (AACW) added as alternative raw materials. The material formulations were evaluated for their compressive strength and thermal conductivity to define two functional units that reflect structural and thermal performance. A prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted under laboratory-scale conditions using the ReCiPe 2016 method. Results show that adding CBW and AACW reduces environmental impacts across several categories, including global warming potential and ecotoxicity, without compromising material performance. Compared to conventional wall systems, the 3D-FOAM materials offer a viable low-impact alternative when assessed on a functional basis. These findings highlight the potential of integrating recycled materials into additive manufacturing to support circular economy goals in the construction sector.

Additive manufacturing has been of considerable interest for the last 10 years. Cementitious composites have been developed to ensure fast and effective structure printing. To address sustainability and reduce the environmental impact of Portland cement-based composites, geopolymer composites have been developed that can be printed. This brings us to this study’s aim, which is to allow the printing of recycled lightweight structures with not only the ability to act as a structural material but also insulation capabilities. This study focuses on mix design development and the mechanical strength, creep, and shrinkage properties of these composites. The results show that foamed 3D-printed fly ash-based geopolymer composites may have reduced compressive strength, but still have sufficient strength to be used as a structural material. Furthermore, their creep and shrinkage strain are lower than those of the composite without foaming agent introduction.