Review identifies shrinkage-control measures and prediction models for geopolymer composites

A review of geopolymer composites reports that fibers, shrinkage-reducing agents, expansive agents, nanoparticles and suitable curing methods can restrain shrinkage, with rational and economical use of these measures reducing shrinkage by up to 60%. The review also identifies the most accurate of the assessed models for predicting drying and autogenous shrinkage, based on R² values of 0.985 and 0.963, respectively.

The review, published in the Journal of Materials Science, focuses on the mechanisms and characteristics of three types of shrinkage in geopolymer composites. Its abstract says the paper systematically analyzes these shrinkage types, clarifies the main factors influencing shrinkage, summarizes corresponding restraining measures, discusses shrinkage prediction models and identifies future directions for model development. Geopolymer is presented as a promising low-carbon and green alternative to ordinary Portland cement, although high shrinkage is described as a limitation on its further development and application.

According to the abstract, fibers, shrinkage-reducing agents, expansive agents, nanoparticles and appropriate curing methods are all reported as effective approaches for restraining shrinkage. The reported maximum reduction of 60% applies to rational and economical application of these measures, rather than to any single intervention. The review also identifies a boundary for nanoparticle use: an excessive content above 0.4% can aggravate shrinkage in geopolymer composites.

Among the prediction models discussed, the Migunthanna model is reported to provide the most accurate prediction of drying shrinkage, with an R² of 0.985. For autogenous shrinkage, the Li model is reported as the most accurate, with an R² of 0.963. These are model-performance results reported in the review’s abstract, not direct measurements from a new experimental program.

The available evidence is limited to the publisher’s abstract and bibliographic information for this review article; the full review is presented behind a subscription preview. As a result, the specific three shrinkage types, the underlying mechanisms, model equations and the broader evidence base for the reported comparisons are not available for independent assessment here. The review states that it can provide a theoretical basis for reduction design and engineering application of geopolymer composites, but the abstract does not establish performance for a particular structural application.

Subject of Research: Review of shrinkage mechanisms, restraining measures and prediction models for geopolymer composites

Article Title: Shrinkage mechanism, restraining measures and prediction models of shrinkage for geopolymer composites: a review

Article References: Zhang, P., Jiang, X., Gao, Z., & Ding, Y. (2026). Shrinkage mechanism, restraining measures and prediction models of shrinkage for geopolymer composites: a review. Journal of Materials Science, 61(42), 32434-32462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-026-13697-6

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10853-026-13697-6

Keywords: geopolymer composites, shrinkage, drying shrinkage, autogenous shrinkage, shrinkage prediction models, fibers, nanoparticles, curing methods, construction materials, mechanism, restraining, measures