ASTM C666 determines the ability of normal weight concrete to resist rapid freezing and thawing cycles and produces microcracking and scaling type failure while conducting on foam concrete [30,112]. Tikalsky et al. [30] developed a modified freeze–thaw test procedure based on ASTM C666. Compressive strength, initial penetration depth, absorption rate variables have important effects on the production of freeze–thaw resistant foam concrete. It was reported that density and permeability are not important variables.

The water entering into the concrete expands during the freezing event and creates stresses. The porous structure of foam concrete provides good freeze–thaw resistance by providing additional space where water can expand [50]. Foam concretes generally offer good FT resistance compared to non-aerated concrete. Shon et al. [78] showed, as a result of their work, that foam concretes with high porosity did not always result in higher FT resistance. It was found that the FT resistance of foam concrete is affected more than the size of the air void, and the number of air voids smaller than 300 µm was reported to play a critical role in reducing FT damage in foam concrete. Since the number of freeze–thaw cycles increases, mass losses increase and spallings occur on the surface of foam concrete samples [23]. The type of foam used in foam concrete has an effect on mass loss and strength loss [36]. Density difference affects the FT resistance of foam concretes. It was reported that low density foam concretes experience more expansion and high loss of mass and strength. This situation was attributed to the larger and interconnected pore structure of low-density foam concretes. Such a pore structure will allow more water intake into the concrete, causing the foam concrete to show lower resistance to FT [11].

When exposed to high temperatures, foamed concrete experiences extreme shrinkage due to high evaporation rates. However, compared to normal concrete, foam concrete has an acceptable FR [57]. FR is related to the changes in the mechanical properties of foam concrete when exposed to high temperatures [3]. Generally, the compressive strength feature of foam concrete increases up to 400 °C. The reason is that high temperature stimulates the reactivity of the binders. However, the strength gradually decreases afterwards [17,18,24].

As the temperature that foam concrete is exposed to increases, hardness loss occurs. It was reported that this loss of hardness starts after 90 °C regardless of the density [80]. It was reported that foam concretes with a density of 950 kg/m³ can withstand fire up to 3.5 h and concrete with a density of 1200 kg/m³ for up to 2 h [3]. Cavity structures help to reduce the effects of high temperature on foam concrete [94]. The pore structure of foam concrete is generally related to density, and it was reported that it is not affected by high temperatures. For this reason, the loss of strength at high temperatures is caused by the changing chemical components of foam concrete [80].

Mineral additives and aggregates affect the properties of foam concrete after exposure to high temperatures. Pozzolanic additives can provide an increase in strength with an increase in temperature. The compressive strength increased after the foam concrete containing RHA and WMP was exposed to 200–400 °C. At temperatures above 400 °C, due to water loss in crystallization, changes in the Ca(OH)₂ content as well as changes in morphology and formation of micro cracks cause a decrease in compressive strength [18]. The thermal resistance of geopolymer foam concrete is evaluated on the changes in compressive strength and volume after exposure to high temperatures. Zhang et al. [17] worked entirely on foam concretes produced with a combination of FA and FA-slag. A 100% increase in compressive strength up to 800 °C was experienced in geopolymer foam concrete (GFC) with FA. However, in GFCs prepared with FA–slag combination, an increase in compressive strength up to 100 °C was observed, and then the compressive strength decreased. Because it is much more degraded with the loss of chemically bound water than gels rich in calcium formed by the FA–slag combination.

Cracks occur in foam concrete as the exposed temperature increases. It was reported that cracks occur on the foam concrete surface after 400 °C and increase with the increase in temperature. At the same time, the cracks seen in foam concretes with high density are more numerous [14]. Moreover, the methods of cooling the samples (with air or water) affect the formation of cracks. It was observed that the slowly cooling (by air) samples had a greater tendency to crack. An increase in the amount of cracks increases the loss of strength [18].

Acoustic properties are the least studied ones for foam concrete. Factors such as the foam content, the amount, size and distribution of pores and the inclusion of their uniformity can affect the sound insulation of foam concrete. Compared to normal concrete wall, foamed concrete cellular walls transmit sound frequency with up to 3% higher value, and foamed concrete has 10 times higher sound absorption rate than dense concrete [57]. It was reported that sound absorption increases at 800–1600 Hz in foam concrete containing FA. This was attributed to the altered pore properties with the addition of FA. In addition, the increase in foam dosage has less of an effect at low frequencies. Medium-frequency foam concretes (600–1000 Hz) were reported to be a more efficient material [17].

Zhua et al. [17] reported that thin GFC samples of 20–25 mm exhibit an impressive acoustic absorption rate (α = 0.7–1.0) in the low frequency region of 40–150 Hz, and that the average sound absorption of the GFC is better than dense concrete. Mastali et al. [59] showed that alkali active slag foam concretes developed using 25–35% foam content in their study exhibited excellent maximum acoustic absorption coefficients (0.8–1) in medium- and high-frequency regions. It was reported that there is a linear correlation between the density and acoustic properties of the alkali active slag foam concretes used in the study. In other words, the acoustic properties are improved by decreasing the density.

The porosity and density of concrete are the two main parameters affecting the thermal conductivity value [51]. The change in the foam ratio affects the dry density, the change in the dry density affects the thermal conductivity [39]. As the dry density increases, the thermal conductivity increases.

Zhang et al. [17], in their study investigating the mechanical, thermal insulation and acoustic properties of geopolymer foam concrete, determined that when the dry density increased from 585 to 1370 kg/m³, thermal conductivity increased from 0.15 to 0.48 W/mK. The amount of porosity increases as the dry density decreases. Increase in porosity decreases thermal conductivity. Similarly, the w/c increase decreases thermal conductivity by increasing porosity [86]. In other words, thermal conductivity increases with dry density. GFC was reported to have better thermal insulation properties than Portland cement foam concrete (same density and/or strength).

Thermal conductivity varies depending on the type of cement used and the foaming gas. The lower the thermal conductivity of the cement and the foaming gas used, the lower the thermal conductivity of the foam concrete [37,39,40]. Li et al. [37] studied the effect of foaming gas and cement type on the thermal conductivity of foamed concrete. For the research, foam concrete was prepared using four different foaming gases (air, hydrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide) and three different cement types (MPC, SAC, OPC). The thermal conductivity of MPC-based foam concrete was higher than that of other cements. The thermal conductivity of foamed concrete using hydrogen foaming gas was the highest, and the one using carbon dioxide foaming gas was the lowest. The reason for this is that carbon dioxide gas has a much lower thermal conductivity (0.014 W/mK) than the ones for atmospheric (0.025 W/mK) and ammonia gasses (0.025 W/mK). Therefore, the use of carbon dioxide foaming gas is an effective method to improve thermal insulation [41]. Partial (30%) replacement of FA with cement helped to reduce the heat of hydration. The use of lightweight aggregates, with low particle density, among air voids artificially inserted into the mortar matrix, was advantageous in reducing thermal conductivity [1]. In the study performed by Gencel et al. [51], the thermal conductivity of foam concrete decreased with the RCA. This is thanks to the increased porosity with the use of RCA. The increase in porosity decreased thermal conductivity. Likewise, thermal conductivity decreased when RCA geopolymer was used in foam concrete. The uniform and increased amount of air void with the use of RCA may have provided this [19]. The SF improves the opening distribution, making the pores more uniform and closed circular, which increases the insulation performance [90]. The use of coir fiber reduced the thermal conductivity of foam concrete. Coir fiber has low thermal conductivity thanks to its high heat resistance. This can be shown as another example proving that materials with low thermal conductivity reduce the thermal conductivity of foam concrete. In addition, the formation of uniform air voids in concrete thanks to fiber addition is another factor that reduces thermal conductivity [60]. The thermal conductivity results of different studies are given in Table 12.