Next Article in Journal
Chitosan/Polyvinyl Alcohol/Tea Tree Essential Oil Composite Films for Biomedical Applications
Next Article in Special Issue
Roles of Waste Glass and the Effect of Process Parameters on the Properties of Sustainable Cement and Geopolymer Concrete—A State-of-the-Art Review
Previous Article in Journal
Highly Efficient Piezoelectrets through Ultra-Soft Elastomeric Spacers
Previous Article in Special Issue
Rice-Husk-Ash-Based Geopolymer Coating: Fire-Retardant, Optimize Composition, Microstructural, Thermal and Element Characteristics Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Polymers
Volume 13
Issue 21
10.3390/polym13213754
polymers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of K/Al Molar Ratio on the Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Metakaolinite-Based Geopolymer Composites

by
Jan Kohout
1,2,*,
Petr Koutník
1,
Pavlína Hájková
1,2,
Eliška Kohoutová
1,2 and
Aleš Soukup
1,2
1
ORLEN UniCRE a.s., Revoluční 1521/84, 400 01 Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic
2
Department of Material Science, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Liberec, Studentská 1402/2, 461 17 Liberec, Czech Republic
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Polymers 2021, 13(21), 3754; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13213754
Submission received: 24 September 2021 / Revised: 25 October 2021 / Accepted: 26 October 2021 / Published: 29 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Geopolymers - Design, Preparation, Applications)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
A metakaolinite-based geopolymer binder was prepared by using calcined claystone as the main raw material and potassium as the alkaline activator. Chamotte was added (65 vol%) to form geopolymer composites. Potassium hydroxide (KOH) was used to adjust the molar ratio of K/Al and the effect of K/Al on thermo-mechanical properties of geopolymer composites was investigated. This study aimed to analyze the effect of K/Al ratio and exposure to high temperatures (up to 1200 °C) on the compressive and flexural strengths, phase composition, pore size distribution, and thermal dilatation. With an increasing K/Al ratio, the crystallization temperature of the new phases (leucite and kalsilite) decreased. Increasing content of K/Al led to a decline in the onset temperature of the major shrinkage. The average pore size slightly increased with increasing K/Al ratio at laboratory temperature. Mechanical properties of geopolymer composites showed degradation with the increase of the K/Al ratio. The exception was the local maximum at a K/Al ratio equal to one. The results showed that the compressive strength decreases with increasing temperature. For thermal applications above 600 °C, it is better to use samples with lower K/Al ratios (0.55 or 0.70).

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Geopolymers are inorganic materials with a wide variety of applications and superior properties which have been intensively studied over the past five decades [1,2,3]. Geopolymers attract attention due to their excellent mechanical properties, high temperature resistance (geopolymers do not ignite, burn, or release any smoke during exposure to fire), and resistance to chemicals (mainly acids and organic solvents) [4,5,6]. Numerous applications of geopolymers have been developed based on their properties—building materials [7], coatings [8], catalysts [9], fiber composites [10,11], sorbents [12], materials for 3D printing [13], waste immobilization [14], etc. Various inert solid materials (quartz, chamotte, cordierite or corundum, etc.) are usually used as a filler in order to improve the properties and/or reduce the price of geopolymer binders [15,16]. Special application of geopolymer composites is a replacement for expensive ceramic materials as heat-resistant materials [17].
Geopolymers are synthesized by mixing powdered aluminosilicates with a liquid alkaline activator at a laboratory (LT) or slightly higher temperatures. Typically used alkaline activators are aqueous alkali metal hydroxide or alkali silicate (water glass). The most commonly used aluminosilicates are metakaolin (calcined kaolin), fly ash, volcanic ash, blast furnace slag, demolition wastes, or rice husk ash [3,18,19]. The process of geopolymer synthesis involves partial dissolution of solid material rich in Al and Si in an alkaline medium, followed by polycondensation reactions of hydrolyzed silicates and aluminates into a three-dimensional polymer network [20,21].
Geopolymer properties depend on the type of aluminosilicate [1,22], the type of alkali cation (Na+ or K+) [23], molar ratios (Si/Al, Si/Me, Me/Al; Me marks an alkali metal) [24,25,26], water content [7,27], curing conditions [28], and types of fillers [2,15]. The effect of Si/Al molar ratios on the mechanical properties and microstructure of geopolymers were investigated in many studies [24,29,30]. Better mechanical properties have been reported for mixtures with Si/Al ratios in the range of 1.5–1.9 [25,31]. The Me/Al molar ratio has been studied primarily with sodium cation [32,33]. Subaer et al. found that with increasing Na/Al molar ratio, the compressive strength of geopolymer binders decreased. Other studies discovered that decreasing the Na/Al molar ratio led to the pore sizes of geopolymer binders increasing and that the highest compressive strengths can be attained when the Na/Al ratio is close to one [33,34]. Reaction rate and extent in all geopolymerization processes can be accelerated and increased by an increased Na/Al ratio [32].
It was found that the potassium-based geopolymers have better compressive strengths than sodium-based geopolymers [35]. The molar ratio of K/Al also have a significant influence on the properties of the geopolymer, but so far, nearly no research has been carried out on discovering the effect of K/Al molar ratio on the thermo-mechanical properties of geopolymers. Tawfik et al. [36] investigated the effect of the K/Al molar ratio between 0.9–1.55 and type of curing on the microstructure and phase formation of a metakaolinite-based geopolymer. They discovered that increasing the molar ratio of K/Al had no significant effect on phase composition of the geopolymer binder.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of K/Al molar ratio on the thermo-mechanical properties of metakaolinite-based geopolymer binder/chamotte composites. The results were compared with the properties of the unfilled geopolymer binders. Geopolymer binders were prepared from calcined kaolinitic claystone and a potassium alkaline activator.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Starting materials used for the preparation of geopolymer binders were commercial metakaolinite-rich material Mefisto L05 produced by the calcination of kaolinitic claystone at about 750 °C in a rotary kiln (České lupkové závody, a.s., Nové Strašecí, Czech Republic), potassium silicate (specific gravity 1384 kg/m3, Vodní sklo, a.s., Prague, Czech Republic) and potassium hydroxide pellets (G.R. grade, 88.2 wt% KOH, Lach-Ner, s.r.o., Neratovice, Czech Republic). Chamotte (České lupkové závody, a.s., Nové Strašecí, Czech Republic) of grain size 0–2 mm was used as a natural filler for the preparation of the geopolymer composites. The chemical compositions of the raw materials are given in Table 1, physical properties are summarized in Table 2, and the results of X-Ray diffraction analysis (XRD, Bruker, Billeica, MA, USA) of aluminosilicate Mefisto L05 and chamotte are shown in Figure 1.

2.2. Preparation of Geopolymers

The alkali activators were obtained by dissolving the solid potassium hydroxide in a commercial potassium silicate solution so that the K:Si molar ratios were 1.2, 1.5, 1.8, 2.1, 2.4, and 2.7. The metakaolinite component Mefisto L05 was dried at 110 °C for 24 h. The geopolymer binders were prepared by mixing dried metakaolinite with alkali activators in a planetary mixer at room temperature for 10 min. Distilled water was then added to achieve a total water content of 30% in the geopolymer binder and mixing was continued for another 5 min. The homogenous mixtures were placed into silicon moulds and vibrated for 5 min in order to remove any air bubbles. The moulds with prepared samples were sealed into polyethylene bags and cured at 60 °C for 4 h in an electric oven. The samples were de-moulded and left to cure at laboratory temperature (LT, 20 °C) for 7 days. The curing conditions, including time, were chosen on the basis of the results of Rovnaník et al. [28], which verified that, under these conditions, the samples reached final strengths.
The prepared geopolymer binders had molar ratios of K:Al = 0.55, 0.70, 0.85, 1.0, 1.15, and 1.30. The Si:Al molar ratio was 1.5 for all tested geopolymer binders. The total water content was 30% in the case of all prepared geopolymer binders. Total water content involved water contained in the commercial potassium silicate solution and potassium hydroxide together with the water added during the binder preparation. The geopolymer binders were chosen on the basis of the results of our previous works, where the geopolymer binders based on Mefisto L05 provided binders with very low viscosity and excellent mechanical properties [19,37]. The geopolymer binders were labelled as GB-X, where X indicates molar ratio of Me:Al.
Geopolymer composites containing 65 vol% of granular inorganic filler were prepared by adding chamotte to pure geopolymer binder (GB) and mixing for another 5 min. The curing conditions were the same as for the geopolymer binders without chamotte addition. The addition of filler was chosen according to the results of our previous work, where the geopolymer composites filled with chamotte provided the optimal properties [15]. The composites with chamotte admixture were labelled as GS-X.
Samples of geopolymer binders and geopolymer composites were cured for 7 days as described above, and were exposed to heat at 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, and 1200 °C. The samples were placed into an electric furnace (Clasic, type 5013V, Řevnice, Czech Republic) and heated at a rate of 5 °C/min, and heat saturated for 1 h at each desired temperature. Subsequently, the samples were cooled inside the furnace down to laboratory temperature. The samples were labelled as GB(S)-X-Y, where Y indicated the temperature exposure in °C.

2.3. Analytical and Testing Methods

Particle size distribution of the aluminosilicate Mefisto L05 was measured by a Mastersizer 2000 laser diffraction particle size analyzer (MALVERN Instruments, Malvern, UK). Agglomerates were disrupted by an ultrasound treatment.
A pycnometric method was used to determine specific gravity and bulk density by pouring powder into a cylindrical vessel.
Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) surface area of the aluminosilicate Mefisto L05 was determined by nitrogen adsorption using an Autosorb iQ (Quantochrome Instruments, Boynton Beach, FL, USA).
Chemical compositions of the solid raw materials were determined by X-ray fluorescence (XRF, Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) using a BRUKER S8 Tiger instrument.
An inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer (ICP-OES) OPTIMA 8000 (Perkin Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA) was used to determine the content of micro-elements and the K/Na ratio in the liquid potassium silicate. Conventional acid-base titration methods were used for determining total content of alkali metals (Na, K) and SiO2 in the potassium silicate (module) solutions. These methods were preferred for their better accuracy at higher concentrations.
An AutoPore IV 9510 mercury intrusion porosimeter (Micromeritics, Unterschleißheim, Germany) was used to determine the pore size distributions of geopolymer composites before and after exposure to a high temperature up to 1200 °C. The porosimeter operates with pressures from 0.01 MPa to 414 MPa. Pore size distribution was evaluated in the range of 4 nm–350 μm for geopolymer binders and composites (full measurement range).
The phase composition of the raw materials, geopolymer binders, and composites was identified by means of a BRUKER D8 Advanced X-Ray diffraction system (XRD) equipped with a BRUKER SSD 160 detector and operating with Cu-Kα radiation with an X-ray source at 40 kV and 25 mA. XRD scanning was performed at the step 2θ = 0.02° over an angular range from 5° to 70° with 1 s dwell time.
Dilation tests up to 1200 °C using a dilatometer (Clasic CZ, type DIL 1500, Řevnice, Czech Republic) were carried out on 5 mm × 5 mm × 50 mm samples of geopolymer binders and 20 mm × 20 mm × 160 mm of geopolymer composites. The measurements were conducted under the same heating conditions (5 °C/min) for all the samples.
A heating microscope for the determination of pyrometric cone refractoriness (Clasic CZ, type 0116 VAK, Řevnice, Czech Republic) of geopolymer binders and geopolymer composites was used. Pyrometric cone refractoriness was determined according to the European standard EN 993-12. This test was carried out with a sharp-edged, trilateral, oblique, truncated cone with the dimensions of 30 mm × 8.5 mm. The temperature was increased at a rate of 5 °C/min. The pyrometric cone refractoriness was determined by simultaneously melting two reference cones with different melting points and placing the tested cone between them.
A universal testing machine, LabTest 6.200 (Labortech, Opava, Czech Republic) fitted with an electric furnace, allowing testing of mechanical properties at temperatures elevated up to 1200 °C, was used for the determination of mechanical properties. Flexural strength was determined using a three-point-bending test on six samples (20 mm × 20 mm × 160 mm) of geopolymer composites before and after exposure to high temperatures up to 1200 °C with a crosshead speed of 0.1 MPa/s (approx. 0.25 mm/min). Compressive strength and modulus of elasticity were measured according to the ISO 1920-10 standard on six prismatic samples (30 mm × 30 mm × 64 mm) of geopolymer composites before and after exposure to high temperatures up to 1200 °C with a crosshead speed of 0.5 MPa/s (approx. 0.25 mm/min). The compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of the geopolymer composites measured in situ at temperatures from 25 to 1200 °C were also tested. The compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of the geopolymer composites were measured on the three prismatic samples (30 mm × 30 mm × 64 mm). The temperature was increased at a rate of 5 °C/min and lasted 1 h at each examined temperature. Mechanical properties were determined 7 days after the sample preparation.
Morphology of the geopolymer composites was studied by a scanning electron microscope JSM-IT500HR from JEOL (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan). Samples were coated with about 5 nm of gold to make them conductive and to prevent charging of the samples in the microscope.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Phase Composition

The X-ray diffraction patterns of the geopolymer binders and composites with various molar ratios of K/Al tested before and after exposure to temperatures up to 1200 °C are reproduced in Figure 2 and Figure 3. The impurities of corundum (Al2O3) identified in some of examined samples were caused by milling in a corundum mill with corundum balls.
On heating, the X-ray pattern for geopolymer binders (Figure 2) remained predominantly amorphous until about 800 °C. The XRD patterns of the geopolymer binders revealed that the presence of leucite (KAlSi2O6) and kalsilite (KAlSiO4) as the main crystalline phases occurred from 800 °C to 1200 °C depending on increasing K/Al. With increasing content of alkalis (potassium), there was an earlier (at lower temperature) formation of crystalline phases. For example, in the sample GB-0.55, the crystalline phase was visible only at a temperature equal to 1200 °C. On the contrary, in the sample GB-1.30, the crystalline phases were visible already at a temperature equal to 800 °C. The kalsilite content increased with increasing ratios of K/Al. Leucite and kalsilite are common crystalline phases for potassium geopolymer binders formed after heat exposure at temperatures ranging from 800 °C to 1300 °C [36,38,39,40,41]. Crystalline impurities such as quartz (SiO2), anatase (TiO2), and muscovite (K(Al4Si2O9(OH)3)) were present in all geopolymer binders. These impurities originated from the raw materials (Table 2 and Figure 1).
Similar changes in XRD patterns were obtained in the case of geopolymer composites (Figure 3). Kalsilite and leucite crystalline phases formed at high temperatures from the amorphous matrix. The formation of crystalline phases at lower temperatures was observed with geopolymer composites with increasing K/Al ratios as in the case of geopolymer binders. In the sample of GS-1.30, the crystalline phases were already visible after exposure to 800 °C. However, no crystalline phases were visible in the GS-0.55 sample even after exposure to 1200 ° C. The low intensity of leucite could be shielded by the high intensity of mullite. The results showed that the chamotte remained inert and did not react with the geopolymer matrix at high temperatures. The presence of the crystalline phase of quartz (SiO2) and its high-temperature form of cristobalite in geopolymer composites is due to the fact that quartz is present as an impurity in the starting aluminosilicate raw material and in the chamotte filler (as cristobalite). Mullite (Al6Si2O13) is the main component of chamotte, as shown in Figure 1b.

3.2. Thermal Properties

3.2.1. Thermal Dilatometry

Figure 4 shows the dilatometric curves (first and second run) of the geopolymer binders with various K/Al molar ratios recorded within the range from 30 °C to 1200 °C with a heating rate of 5 °C/min. The dilatometric curves showed that all samples of geopolymer binders shrank in the temperature range between 150 °C to 700–900 °C (depending on the K/Al ratio). Initial shrinkage was due to the dehydration of free evaporable water from the pores at temperatures under 300 °C. In the temperature range of 300 to 700–900 °C, continued shrinkage was observed in all samples due to dehydroxylation. The second major shrinkage occurred at a temperature of 700–900 °C (depending on the sample) up to the temperature limit of the experiment (1200 °C). This was presumably caused by the crystallization of new phases (leucite and kalsilite) or by the dissolution of undissolved metakaolinite. The onset temperatures of the major shrinkage (crystallization) decreased with increasing K/Al ratios, which is in accordance with the XRD patterns described above (Figure 2). Significant shrinkage of the sample GB-0.55 was observed at a temperature of about 900 °C and in the case of the sample GB-1.30 at 700 °C. Inconspicuous linear shrinkage was observed at all samples of geopolymer binders during cooling. The geopolymer binders expanded linearly during the second run of dilatometry. The heating and cooling curves in the second run of dilatometry copied the cooling curve in the first run. This fact has already been observed by Lemougna et al. [26]. It can be observed that total shrinkage of geopolymer binders was in the range of 12–20% from their total length after the first run of heating and cooling. The smallest total shrinkage (about 12%) was found with samples GB-1.0 and GB-1.15. This finding corresponds well with the previous research in which the potassium geopolymer binders experienced similar total shrinkage—Kuenezel et al. [42] (25%), Kovařík et al. [43] (15%), and Lahoti et al. [29] (12%). The linear coefficients of thermal expansion (α) of samples GB-0.55, GB-0.70, GB-0.85, GB-1.0, GB-1.15, and GB-1.30 were about 0.82, 2.55, 2.59, 2.61, 2.55, and 2.39 × 10−5/°C. These coefficients α were measured between 200 and 600 °C during the second run of heating.
Dilatations (first and second run) of geopolymer composites with different K/Al molar ratios are displayed in Figure 4. In the first run of dilatation, all experimental samples of geopolymer composites exhibited a small expansion in the temperature range from 30 to 150 °C. This change was probably caused by the expansion of the fillers. The mildly expanding area within the temperature range from 150 °C to about 700–900 °C (depending on the type of sample) is given by the compensation of the binder shrinkage due to dehydroxylation and filler expansion. A leading change was observed with temperatures between 700–900 °C (depending on K/Al) as well as in the case of geopolymer binders. Significant shrinkage occurred in the case of samples GS-0.55, GS-0.70, GS-0.85, slight shrinkage for sample GS-1.0, and more significant expansion in the case of samples GS-1.15 and GS-1.30. These changes were due to a combination of new phases crystallization (kalsilite and leucite) and filler expansion. The temperature limit of the onset of crystallization decreased as the potassium content increased and at the same time, the tested samples expanded remarkably. Thermal changes of the filler (chamotte) correspond to its linear coefficient of thermal expansion (α), which is approximately 4.5 × 10–6 /°C, and the value was measured in the temperature range from 25 °C to 900 °C [44]. Chamotte, used as a filler, is a heat-resistant material, so the geopolymer composites that contain it are not so prone to changes in volume. Therefore, it is evident from Figure 4 that the presence of chamotte in all geopolymer binders significantly reduced shrinkage. Total shrinkage of all geopolymer composites did not outreach 2.1% of their total length after the first run of heating and cooling. In the research papers of Rovnaník et al. [1] and Kovařík et al. [43], the total shrinkage of potassium geopolymer composites with chamotte also did not exceed 2.5%. The samples of GS-0.85 and GS-1.0 had optimal behavior under the first run of heating, the samples of GS-0.55 and GS-0.70 showed significant shrinkage, and GS-1.15 and GS-1.30 samples had obvious expansion. The linear coefficients of thermal expansion (α) of GS-0.55, GS-0.70, GS-0.85, GS-1.0, GS-1.15, and GS-1.30 were 4.96, 5.13, 5.89, 6.14, 6.21, and 6.96 × 10−6/°C. These values were measured between 200 and 1000 °C during the second run of heating. The coefficients of thermal expansion indicated that thermal expansion increased with increasing alkali content.
Low shrinkage of geopolymer composites proves the possibility of their use in thermal engineering (thermally stressed applications, linings in chimneys, or fireplaces).

3.2.2. Pyrometric Cone Refractoriness

The ability to resist high temperatures (refractoriness) was examined for geopolymer binders and composites with various K/Al molar ratios. The results of these tests are shown in Figure 5. The refractoriness of geopolymer binders increased with increasing K/Al. The temperature difference between the limit samples (GB-0.55 and GB-1.30) was 130 °C. The addition of chamotte aggregate to the geopolymer binders resulted in a decrease in their refractoriness. The reduction in refractory value could be due to earlier sintering of the geopolymer matrix and chamotte or due to the lower melting point of the chamotte filler. The exceptions were samples GS-0.55 (1660 °C) and GS-0.70 (1640 °C), which had a refractory temperature significantly higher than the corresponding geopolymer binders GB-0.55 (1450 °C) and GB-0.70 (1510 °C). These two samples also differed from other geopolymer composites, which had a refractory temperature of around 1500 °C. This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that the samples firstly began to collapse inwardly, instead of starting to fall with the tip of the cone to the base. High values of refractoriness may not be due to high temperature resistance of these samples. The results reveal that almost all prepared samples (except GB-0.55) could withstand high temperatures up to 1500 °C. This was especially true of samples with a K/Al ratio equal to 0.85 or 1.0. The result of refractoriness of GS-1.0 is comparable with the result (1500 °C) of our previous research [15], where GS-1.0 was also tested.
Pyrometric cone refractoriness confirms the previously found information that the prepared geopolymer composites achieve very good heat resistance. The samples are well suited for use in high-temperature applications as a replacement for expensive ceramic materials.

3.3. Mechanical Properties

Figure 6 shows the flexural strength of all prepared geopolymer composites with various K/Al ratios before and after exposure to high temperatures. It can be seen that the values of flexural strength of geopolymer composites at laboratory temperature and after heat exposure to 200 °C were comparable (around 12 MPa) with increasing K/Al ratios up to a value of 1, followed by a significant decrease in strength with increasing K/Al ratios. Okada et al. observed a similar trend in the flexural strength curves with increasing Na/Al for metakaolin-based geopolymer binders [45]. Higher temperatures (up to 1200 °C) and higher potassium content (up to 1.30) resulted in a decrease of flexural strengths of geopolymer composites. The decrease of flexural strength at high temperatures for samples with higher K/Al ratios was probably due to their earlier crystallization (see Figure 3). Changes in flexural strengths of geopolymer composites after exposure to high temperatures followed a decreasing trend up to 1000 °C. The causes of the decrease were probably dehydration and the formation of cracks in the material during heating and cooling [43,46]. Exposure to 1200 °C led to a slight increase in flexural strength, which can be explained by the start of sintering of the material. A decline in flexural strength increases due to thermal exposure with increasing K/Al molar ratios.
The samples GS-1.0 and GS-0.55 showed the highest flexural strength (12.7 and 12.2 MPa) at laboratory temperature. The samples GS-0.55 and GS-0.70 had a flexural strength of 10.3 and 6.4 MPa after exposure to 1200 °C. The sample GS-0.55 excelled in great stability because the decrease in flexural strength was only 15% between LT and 1200 °C. On the contrary, a higher decrease in flexural strength (50%) between LT and 1200 °C was observed for the GS-1.0 sample. The sample GS-1.30 had flexural strengths of only 7.2 and 2.9 MPa at laboratory temperature and after exposure to 1200 °C. Musil et al. [47] also noticed a decrease in flexural strength with increasing temperature (LT—13 MPa and 1200 °C—3.44 MPa) for potassium geopolymer with addition of chamotte as a filler.
Compressive strengths of geopolymer composites with varied K/Al before and after exposure to high temperatures are given in Figure 7a. The results confirmed the earlier published finding, i.e., a decrease in compressive strength with increasing temperatures (from average 70 MPa to about 15 MPa at 1000 °C) in geopolymer composites (the exceptions were some samples after exposure to 200 °C) [1,48,49,50]. The decrease in compressive strength was caused by dehydration of the geopolymer matrix and possible simultaneous development of microcracks and internal damage in the geopolymer structure [46]. A minor increase in compressive strength was observed in all samples after exposure to 200 °C. This change can be attributed to the solidification of the gel and increase in surface forces between the particles due to the release of adsorbed moisture. The compressive strength of the geopolymer composites also increased after exposure to 1200 °C. The increase could probably be due to sintering of the samples as in the case of flexural strength. Compressive strength decreased with increasing K/Al ratio. The exception was the local maximum at K/Al ratio equal to one, which was significant at laboratory temperature and after exposure to 200 °C. The local maximum decreased with higher exposure temperatures and at 1000 °C and 1200 °C was no longer evident. The trend of increase and consecutive decrease in compressive strength with increasing Na/Al ratios was observed by Liu et al. [33]. They achieved the highest compressive strength with a sample with Na/Al equal to one. A moderate decrease in compressive strength was noted with tested geopolymer composites with an increased potassium content at higher temperatures (from 400 °C to 1200 °C).
When the K/Al ratio was 1.0, the compressive strength of GS-1.0 sample reached the maximum (95.2 MPa) at laboratory temperature. Almost all examined geopolymer composites had comparable results of compressive strength (approx. 14 Mpa) after calcination to 1200 °C. An exception was the sample GS-0.55, which had a compressive strength of 25.2 MPa. Measured results of compressive strength of geopolymer composites with chamotte at laboratory temperature and after exposure to higher temperature were higher compared with previously published results by Rovnaník et al. [1,49] (37 MPa at 25 °C and 10 MPa at 1200 °C) and Trindadea et al. [48] (62 MPa at 25 °C and 18 MPa at 1200 °C). Higher values of compressive strength can be attributed to the appropriate selection of optimized geopolymer binders based on calcined claystone, which were previously verified by Koutník et al. [19].
Figure 7b displays the compressive strength of geopolymer composites with varied K/Al measured at temperatures from 25 °C to 1200 °C (in situ). It is evident that compressive strength tested in situ at the required temperature did not show results comparable with compressive strength tested after exposure to an elevated temperature (via Figure 7a). A decrease in compressive strength up to a temperature of 400 °C was also observed with in situ-investigated samples; the drop was caused by the previously mentioned dehydration. From temperatures of 600 to 1000 °C, the samples tested in situ had significantly higher values of compressive strength compared with samples tested after exposure to an elevated temperature. The increase in compressive strength was probably due to the absence of a cooling phase during in situ testing, which can be a source of cracks and increasing plasticity of the geopolymer composite at higher temperatures [15]. Sample GS-1.0 had higher compressive strength values tested in situ at elevated temperatures compared with samples GS-0.70, GS-0.85, GS-1.15, and GS-1.30. Sample GS-0.55 had analogous results to sample GS-1.0. Samples GS-0.55 and GS-1.0 gave exceptional results of compressive strengths (99.9 and 97.1 MPa) at an elevated temperature of 1000 °C.
Figure 8a shows the dependences of the modulus of elasticity of geopolymer composites on the K/Al ratio in the binder for different exposure temperatures (ex situ). Curves of modulus of elasticity at different temperatures with different K/Al ratios were very similar to curves of compressive strength (Figure 7a), which meant a reduction in the modulus of elasticity with higher exposure temperatures and analogous behavior depending on the different K/Al ratios. A significant decrease in the modulus of elasticity was observed from a temperature of 200 °C due to dehydration of water from the pores of geopolymer binders. The values of modulus of elasticity first increased and then decreased with rising K/Al ratios. Similar behavior was observed by Zhang et al. [51], who investigated the geopolymer binders with different Si/Al and Na/Al molar ratios prepared from metakaolin. GS-1.0 had a modulus of elasticity 29.9 GPa at laboratory temperature and 4.1 GPa after exposure to 1200 °C. The highest modulus of elasticity after exposure to 1200 °C was with sample GS-0.55, and the value was 8.8 GPa. The modulus of elasticity observed by Zhang et al. [51] was 1 GPa with the sample with an Na/Al ratio equal to one tested at laboratory temperature. The large difference in modulus of elasticity may be due to different used cation, curing conditions, or higher water content.
The modulus of elasticity of geopolymer composites with varied K/Al tested in situ at elevated temperatures up to 1200 °C are given in Figure 8b. It is clear from the results that the modulus of elasticity tested in situ decreased with elevated temperature as well as in the case of samples tested after heat exposure and cooling (via Figure 8a). The modulus of elasticity of all tested samples was almost zero after exposure to 1000 °C and 1200 °C due to the plastic behavior of geopolymer binders at higher temperatures (1000 and 1200 °C). The dependence of the deformation on the stress was nonlinear in terms of a high increase in deformation. The plastic behavior was probably caused by the already mentioned new crystalline phases.

3.4. Porosity

The pore size distributions of geopolymer composites before and after exposure to elevated temperatures of 400, 800, and 1200 °C were characterized by mercury intrusion porosimetry. As shown in Figure 9, characteristic pore size gradually increased with the increase of temperature, especially from a temperature of 800 °C. Geopolymer composites contained mainly mesopores up to 10 nm after curing at laboratory temperature (25 °C). Therefore, the average pore size increased from tens of nanometers to hundreds (samples GS-1.0, GS-1.15, and GS-1.30) or micrometers (samples GS-0.55, GS-0.70, and GS-0.85) after exposure to a temperature of 1200 °C. Pore volume of test samples increased slightly with increasing temperatures up to 800 °C (probably due to dehydroxylation) and then decreased at 1200 °C. Significant changes in porosity from 800 °C were probably caused by crystallization of the new phases which caused the shrinkage of the geopolymer matrix.
As shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10, from laboratory temperature (25 °C) to 800 °C, with the increasing of K/Al, the pore size more or less increased, while from 1000 °C to 1200 °C, the pore size drastically decreased with higher molar ratios. A large decrease occurred in the sample GS-1.0. Samples GS-0.55, GS-0.70, and GS-0.85 had values of average pore size 10, 14, and 15 nm after hardening at laboratory temperature and 2172, 2570, and 2145 nm after exposure to 1200 °C. On the contrary, samples GS-1.0, GS-1.15, and GS-1.30 had values of average pore size 11, 27, and 26 nm after hardening at laboratory temperature and 485, 170, and 206 nm after exposure to 1200 °C. The effect of K/Al on pore volume was not significant. Pore volume of all samples ranged from 90 to 120 mm3/g. Rovnaník et al. [1] investigated the porosity of matekaolin-based geopolymer composite filled with chamotte before and after exposure to high temperatures. They found out that values of pore volume were 120 mm3/g after exposure to high temperatures (up to 1000 °C).

3.5. Morphology

Figure 11 shows SEM images of geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al after hardening. The images showed that the geopolymer matrix contained undissolved plates of metakaolinite (highlighted by a white circle in Figure 11). The structure was mostly compact and did not contain a large number of visible pores. The exceptions were samples GB-0.55 and GB-0.70, which had a relatively loose gel with agglomerated fine particles and less platy particles. That is, the increase of potassium content is beneficial for geopolymerization. The increase in density with increasing molar ratios of Na/Al was also observed by Hou et al. [32].
SEM images of geopolymer binders with different K/Al molar ratios after exposure to elevated temperature (1000 °C) are shown in Figure 12. As can be seen, the structure of the geopolymer matrix rapidly changed after exposure to high temperature. The post exposure geopolymer binders had fewer inclusions and exhibited a smoother homogeneous texture than the unexposed geopolymer (highlighted by a white square in Figure 12). The structure was porous, which is consistent with the results of porosity. This was caused by the viscous sintering and phase changes of the geopolymer binders during high-temperature exposure. Similar findings about the structure of a geopolymer binder prepared from metakaolin after exposure to elevated temperatures were previously documented by Bell et al. [52], Lahoti et al. [29], and Duxson et al. [40].

4. Conclusions

In this study, the effect of the K/Al ratio at elevated temperatures on thermo-mechanical properties of metakaolinite-based geopolymers filled with chamotte was investigated. The following conclusions can be drawn from the obtained results:
  • The X-ray diffractograms showed that geopolymers had a stable amorphous phase up to temperatures of 800–1200 °C depending on the K/Al ratio. The temperature of formation of the crystalline phases decreased with increasing K/Al ratios.
  • Increasing of K/Al ratio led to a decline in the onset temperature of the major shrinkage. The addition of chamotte into geopolymer binders resulted in a decrease of total shrinkage of the geopolymer composites (from 12–20% to 0.4–2.1%).
  • Increasing addition of potassium content led to a rise in the refractoriness of geopolymer binders. The addition of chamotte to geopolymer binders resulted in a reduction of their refractoriness.
  • The compressive and flexural strength and modulus of elasticity decreased with growing K/Al ratios. The exception was the local maximum at K/Al ratio 1, which was the most evident at laboratory temperature and at 200 °C.
  • Results of the compressive strength tested in situ did not show comparable results with compressive strength tested after exposure to elevated temperatures, which followed a decreasing path with increasing temperature. The values of compressive strength tested in situ began to rise from 600 °C.
  • Average pore diameter increased slightly with increasing potassium content at laboratory temperature and at elevated temperatures up to 800 °C, while from 1000 °C to 1200 °C, the pore size drastically decreased. The effect of K/Al ratio on total pore volume was not significant.
  • As a result of calcination at high temperatures, phase changes occurred in the binder and the inhomogeneous geopolymer matrix with undissolved metakaolinite plates turning into a homogeneous porous structure with visible pores.
The results of this study showed that geopolymer composites containing chamotte with K/Al ratios equal to one had optimal properties at laboratory temperature. Sample GS-1.0 displayed high mechanical strength at laboratory temperature. GS-1.0 can be used under load up to a temperature of approximately 600 °C, and at higher temperature the GS-1.0 becomes plastic under load, although heat resistance (without load) was 1500 °C. For thermal applications above 600 °C, it is better to use samples with lower K/Al ratios (sample 0.55 or 0.70), which have high refractoriness (approx. 1650 °C) and high mechanical strength after thermal exposure and even in situ under high temperatures. However, the samples with lower K/Al ratios have higher shrinkage during the first heating.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.K. and P.K.; methodology, J.K. and P.K.; validation, J.K., P.K. and P.H.; formal analysis, J.K.; investigation, J.K.; resources, J.K. and E.K.; data curation, J.K. and A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, J.K.; writing—review and editing, J.K., P.K., P.H., E.K. and A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The publication is a result of the project which was carried out within the financial support of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Czech Republic with institutional support for long-term conceptual development of research organization. The result was achieved using the infrastructure included in the project Efficient Use of Energy Resources Using Catalytic Processes (LM2018119) which has been financially supported by MEYS within the targeted support of large infrastructures.
This publication was written at the Technical University of Liberec, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering with the support of the Institutional Endowment for the Long Term Conceptual Development of Research Institutes, as provided by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic in the year 2021.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rovnanik, P.; Safrankova, K. Thermal Behaviour of Metakaolin/Fly Ash Geopolymers with Chamotte Aggregate. Materials 2016, 9, 535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Perná, I.; Novotná, M.; Řimnáčová, D.; Šupová, M. New Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers with the Addition of Different Types of Waste Stone Powder. Crystals 2021, 11, 983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bouna, L.; Ait El Fakir, A.; Benlhachemi, A.; Draoui, K.; Ezahri, M.; Bakiz, B.; Villain, S.; Guinneton, F.; Elalem, N. Synthesis and characterization of mesoporous geopolymer based on Moroccan kaolinite rich clay. Appl. Clay Sci. 2020, 196, 105764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lyon, R.E.; Balaguru, P.N.; Foden, A.; Sorathia, U.; Davidovits, J.; Davidovics, M. Fire-resistant Aluminosilicate Composites. Fire Mater. 1997, 21, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Davidovits, J. Geopolymer: Chemistry and Applications; Institut Géopolymère: Saint-Quentin, France, 2008; p. 285. [Google Scholar]
  6. Davidovits, J. Properties of geopolymer cement. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Alkaline Cements and Concretes, Kiev, Ukraine, 11–14 October 1994; pp. 131–149. [Google Scholar]
  7. Aliabdo, A.A.; Abd Elmoaty, A.E.M.; Salem, H.A. Effect of water addition, plasticizer and alkaline solution constitution on fly ash based geopolymer concrete performance. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 121, 694–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, Z.; Wang, H. 22-Alkali-activated cements for protective coating of OPC concrete. In Handbook of Alkali-Activated Cements, Mortars and Concretes; Woodhead Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 605–626. [Google Scholar]
  9. Alzeer, M.I.M.; MacKenzie, K.J.D.; Keyzers, R.A. Porous aluminosilicate inorganic polymers (geopolymers): A new class of environmentally benign heterogeneous solid acid catalysts. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2016, 524, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Haincova, E.; Hajkova, P.; Kohout, J. Prepregs for Temperature Resistant Composites. Materials 2019, 12, 4012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Haincova, E.; Hajkova, P. Effect of Boric Acid Content in Aluminosilicate Matrix on Mechanical Properties of Carbon Prepreg Composites. Materials 2020, 13, 5409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Mužek, M.N.; Svilović, S.; Zelić, J. Fly ash-based geopolymeric adsorbent for copper ion removal from wastewater. Desalination Water Treat. 2013, 52, 2519–2526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Xia, M.; Sanjayan, J. Method of formulating geopolymer for 3D printing for construction applications. Mater. Des. 2016, 110, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lancellotti, I.; Barbieri, L.; Leonelli, C. 20-Use of alkali-activated concrete binders for toxic waste immobilization. In Handbook of Alkali-Activated Cements, Mortars and Concretes; Woodhead Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 539–554. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kohout, J.; Koutnik, P. Effect of Filler Type on the Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Metakaolinite-Based Geopolymer Composites. Materials 2020, 13, 2395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kai, M.-F.; Dai, J.-G. Understanding geopolymer binder-aggregate interfacial characteristics at molecular level. Cem. Concr. Res. 2021, 149, 106582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Thang, N.H.; Nhung, L.T.; Quyen, P.V.T.H.; Phong, D.T.; Khe, D.T.; Van Phuc, N. Development of heat resistant geopolymer-based materials from red mud and rice husk ash. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Applied Sciences, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 24–25 May 2018; Volume 1954. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hájková, P. Kaolinite Claystone-Based Geopolymer Materials: Effect of Chemical Composition and Curing Conditions. Minerals 2018, 8, 444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Koutník, P.; Soukup, A.; Bezucha, P.; Šafář, J.; Kohout, J. Low viscosity metakaolinite based geopolymer binders. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 230, 116978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kohout, J.; Koutník, P.; Bezucha, P.; Kwoczynski, Z. Leachability of the metakaolinite-rich materials in different alkaline solutions. Mater. Today Commun. 2019, 21, 100669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Amran, Y.H.M.; Alyousef, R.; Alabduljabbar, H.; El-Zeadani, M. Clean production and properties of geopolymer concrete; A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 251, 119679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Xu, H.; Van Deventer, J.S.J. The geopolymerisation of alumino-silicate minerals. Int. J. Miner. Process. 2000, 59, 247–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Yao, X.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, H.; Chen, Y. Geopolymerization process of alkali–metakaolinite characterized by isothermal calorimetry. Thermochim. Acta 2009, 493, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yan, D.; Xie, L.; Qian, X.; Ruan, S.; Zeng, Q. Compositional Dependence of Pore Structure, Strengthand Freezing-Thawing Resistance of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers. Materials 2020, 13, 2973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Duxson, P.; Mallicoat, S.W.; Lukey, G.C.; Kriven, W.M.; van Deventer, J.S.J. The effect of alkali and Si/Al ratio on the development of mechanical properties of metakaolin-based geopolymers. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2007, 292, 8–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lemougna, P.N.; Chinje Melo, U.F.; Delplancke, M.-P.; Rahier, H. Influence of the activating solution composition on the stability and thermo-mechanical properties of inorganic polymers (geopolymers) from volcanic ash. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 48, 278–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Vitola, L.; Pundiene, I.; Pranckeviciene, J.; Bajare, D. The Impact of the Amount of Water Used in Activation Solution and the Initial Temperature of Paste on the Rheological Behaviour and Structural Evolution of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymer Pastes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rovnaník, P. Effect of curing temperature on the development of hard structure of metakaolin-based geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 1176–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lahoti, M.; Wong, K.K.; Yang, E.-H.; Tan, K.H. Effects of Si/Al molar ratio on strength endurance and volume stability of metakaolin geopolymers subject to elevated temperature. Ceram. Int. 2018, 44, 5726–5734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ozer, I.; Soyer-Uzun, S. Relations between the structural characteristics and compressive strength in metakaolin based geopolymers with different molar Si/Al ratios. Ceram. Int. 2015, 41, 10192–10198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Silva, P.D.; Sagoe-Crenstil, K.; Sirivivatnanon, V. Kinetics of geopolymerization: Role of Al2O3 and SiO2. Cem. Concr. Res. 2007, 37, 512–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hou, L.; Li, J.; Lu, Z.-y. Effect of Na/Al on formation, structures and properties of metakaolin based Na-geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 226, 250–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Liu, J.; Li, X.; Lu, Y.; Bai, X. Effects of Na/Al ratio on mechanical properties and microstructure of red mud-coal metakaolin geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 263, 120653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lahoti, M.; Narang, P.; Tan, K.H.; Yang, E.-H. Mix design factors and strength prediction of metakaolin-based geopolymer. Ceram. Int. 2017, 43, 11433–11441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Duxson, P.; Provis, J.L.; Lukey, G.C.; Mallicoat, S.W.; Kriven, W.M.; van Deventer, J.S.J. Understanding the relationship between geopolymer composition, microstructure and mechanical properties. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2005, 269, 47–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tawfik, A.; Abd El-Raoof, F.; Katsuki, H.; MacKenzie, K.J.D.; Komarneni, S. K-Based Geopolymer from metakaolin: Roles of K/Al ratio and water or steam Curing at different temperatures. Mater. Constr. 2016, 66, e081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Koutnik, P. Comparison of Kaolin and Kaolinitic Claystones as Raw Materials for Preparing Meta-Kaolinite-Based Geopolymers. Ceramics–Silikaty 2019, 63, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Barbosa, V.F.F.; MacKenzie, K.J.D. Synthesis and thermal behaviour of potassium sialate geopolymers. Mater. Lett. 2003, 57, 1477–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lin, T.S.; Jia, D.C.; He, P.G.; Wang, M.R. Thermo-mechanical and Microstructural Characterization of Geopolymers with α-Al2O3 Particle Filler. Int. J. Thermophys. 2009, 30, 1568–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Duxson, P.; Lukey, G.C.; van Deventer, J.S.J. Thermal evolution of metakaolin geopolymers: Part 1–Physical evolution. J. Non-Cryst. Solids 2006, 352, 5541–5555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Medri, V.; Fabbri, S.; Ruffini, A.; Dedecek, J.; Vaccari, A. SiC-based refractory paints prepared with alkali aluminosilicate binders. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2011, 31, 2155–2165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kuenzel, C.; Vandeperre, L.J.; Donatello, S.; Boccaccini, A.R.; Cheeseman, C.; Brown, P. Ambient Temperature Drying Shrinkage and Cracking in Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2012, 95, 3270–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Kovářík, T.; Rieger, D.; Kadlec, J.; Křenek, T.; Kullová, L.; Pola, M.; Bělský, P.; Franče, P.; Říha, J. Thermomechanical properties of particle-reinforced geopolymer composite with various aggregate gradation of fine ceramic filler. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 143, 599–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Westman, A.E.R. The Thermal Expansion of Fireclay Bricks. Univ. Ill. Bull. 1928, 26, 1–30. [Google Scholar]
  45. Okada, K.; Ooyama, A.; Isobe, T.; Kameshima, Y.; Nakajima, A.; MacKenzie, K.J.D. Water retention properties of porous geopolymers for use in cooling applications. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2009, 29, 1917–1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lemougna, P.N.; MacKenzie, K.J.D.; Melo, U.F.C. Synthesis and thermal properties of inorganic polymers (geopolymers) for structural and refractory applications from volcanic ash. Ceram. Int. 2011, 37, 3011–3018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Musil, S.S.; Kriven, W.M.; Biernacki, J. In SituMechanical Properties of Chamotte Particulate Reinforced, Potassium Geopolymer. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2014, 97, 907–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Trindade, A.C.C.; Silva, F.d.A.; Alcamand, H.A.; Borges, P.H.R. On The Mechanical Behavior of Metakaolin Based Geopolymers Under Elevated Temperatures. Mater. Res. 2017, 20 (Suppl. S2), 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Rovnaník, P. Effect of the aggregate type on the properties of alkali-activated slag subjected to high temperatures. Mater. Tehnol. 2015, 49, 709–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Fayyad, S.M.; Al-Marahleh, G.S.; Abu-Ein, S.Q. Improvement of the Refractoriness under Load of Fire-Clay Refractory Bricks. Adv. Theor. Appl. Mech. 2012, 5, 161–172. [Google Scholar]
  51. Zhang, M.; Zhao, M.; Zhang, G.; El-Korchi, T.; Tao, M. A multiscale investigation of reaction kinetics, phase formation, and mechanical properties of metakaolin geopolymers. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2017, 78, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Bell, J.L.; Driemeyer, P.E.; Kriven, W.M. Formation of Ceramics from Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers. Part II: K-Based Geopolymer. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2009, 92, 607–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Polymers 13 03754 g001 550
Figure 1. XRD patterns of the aluminosilicate Mefisto L05 (a) and chamotte (b).
Figure 1. XRD patterns of the aluminosilicate Mefisto L05 (a) and chamotte (b).
Polymers 13 03754 g001
Polymers 13 03754 g002 550
Figure 2. XRD patterns of the geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Figure 2. XRD patterns of the geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Polymers 13 03754 g002
Polymers 13 03754 g003 550
Figure 3. XRD patterns of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GS-0.55, (b)—-0.70, (c)—GS-0.85, (d)—GS-1.0, (e)—GS-1.15, (f)—GS-1.30) at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Figure 3. XRD patterns of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GS-0.55, (b)—-0.70, (c)—GS-0.85, (d)—GS-1.0, (e)—GS-1.15, (f)—GS-1.30) at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Polymers 13 03754 g003
Polymers 13 03754 g004 550
Figure 4. The dilatometric curves of the first and second runs of geopolymer binders (y-axis on the left) and composites (y-axis on the right) with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55 and GS-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70 and GS-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85 and GS-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0 and GS-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15 and GS-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30 and GS-1.30) up to 1200 °C (5 °C/min).
Figure 4. The dilatometric curves of the first and second runs of geopolymer binders (y-axis on the left) and composites (y-axis on the right) with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55 and GS-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70 and GS-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85 and GS-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0 and GS-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15 and GS-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30 and GS-1.30) up to 1200 °C (5 °C/min).
Polymers 13 03754 g004
Polymers 13 03754 g005 550
Figure 5. Pyrometric cone refractoriness of geopolymer binders (GB) and composites (GS) with various molar ratios of K/Al.
Figure 5. Pyrometric cone refractoriness of geopolymer binders (GB) and composites (GS) with various molar ratios of K/Al.
Polymers 13 03754 g005
Polymers 13 03754 g006 550
Figure 6. Flexural strength of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Figure 6. Flexural strength of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C.
Polymers 13 03754 g006
Polymers 13 03754 g007 550
Figure 7. Compressive strength of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C (a) and in situ temperature from 25 °C to 1200 °C (b).
Figure 7. Compressive strength of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C (a) and in situ temperature from 25 °C to 1200 °C (b).
Polymers 13 03754 g007
Polymers 13 03754 g008 550
Figure 8. Modulus of elasticity of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C (a) and in situ temperature from 25 °C to 1200 °C (b).
Figure 8. Modulus of elasticity of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature and after exposure up to 1200 °C (a) and in situ temperature from 25 °C to 1200 °C (b).
Polymers 13 03754 g008
Polymers 13 03754 g009 550
Figure 9. Mercury intrusion porosimetry of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature (a) and after exposure to 400 °C (b), 800 °C (c), and 1200 °C (d).
Figure 9. Mercury intrusion porosimetry of the geopolymer composites with various molar ratios of K/Al at laboratory temperature (a) and after exposure to 400 °C (b), 800 °C (c), and 1200 °C (d).
Polymers 13 03754 g009
Polymers 13 03754 g010 550
Figure 10. The influence of increasing temperature on the average pore diameter of geopolymer composites.
Figure 10. The influence of increasing temperature on the average pore diameter of geopolymer composites.
Polymers 13 03754 g010
Polymers 13 03754 g011 550
Figure 11. Micrographs of geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) at laboratory temperature.
Figure 11. Micrographs of geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) at laboratory temperature.
Polymers 13 03754 g011
Polymers 13 03754 g012 550
Figure 12. Micrographs of geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) after exposure to 1000 °C.
Figure 12. Micrographs of geopolymer binders with various molar ratios of K/Al ((a)—GB-0.55, (b)—GB-0.70, (c)—GB-0.85, (d)—GB-1.0, (e)—GB-1.15, (f)—GB-1.30) after exposure to 1000 °C.
Polymers 13 03754 g012
Table
Table 1. Chemical composition (wt%) of raw materials according to XRF measurements.
Table 1. Chemical composition (wt%) of raw materials according to XRF measurements.
Material Material Composition (%)
a LOIH2OSiO2Al2O3Fe2O3CaOMgONa2OK2OTiO2P2O5V2O5ZrO2
Mefisto L051.30-52.242.90.880.16--0.751.620.070.050.03
Potassium silicate-60.427.00.050.01--0.3812.1----
Chamotte0.02-52.143.61.240.170.120.050.941.650.06-0.05
a LOI = Loss on ignition.
Table
Table 2. Physical properties of raw materials.
Table 2. Physical properties of raw materials.
MaterialSpecific GravityBulk DensityParticle SizeSpecific Surface Area (BET)
(kg/m3)(kg/m3)d50 (µm)d90 (µm)(m2/g)
Mefisto L0524556145.5816.4713.4
Chamotte25411494---
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kohout, J.; Koutník, P.; Hájková, P.; Kohoutová, E.; Soukup, A. Effect of K/Al Molar Ratio on the Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Metakaolinite-Based Geopolymer Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 3754. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13213754

AMA Style

Kohout J, Koutník P, Hájková P, Kohoutová E, Soukup A. Effect of K/Al Molar Ratio on the Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Metakaolinite-Based Geopolymer Composites. Polymers. 2021; 13(21):3754. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13213754

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kohout, Jan, Petr Koutník, Pavlína Hájková, Eliška Kohoutová, and Aleš Soukup. 2021. "Effect of K/Al Molar Ratio on the Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Metakaolinite-Based Geopolymer Composites" Polymers 13, no. 21: 3754. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13213754

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop