Title:
Data-Driven Decision-Making to Inform Sustainable Performance-Based Specifications
Author(s):
Renee T. Rios, Francesca Lolli, Katelynn Schoenrock, Kimberly E. Kurtis
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
355
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
213-224
Keywords:
Bootstrapping; CO2 emissions; Compressive strength; Confidence interval; Data analysis; Performancebased specifications; Statistics; Surface resistivity; Sustainability
DOI:
10.14359/51736027
Date:
7/1/2022
Abstract:
Performance-based specifications (PBS) may increase concrete quality and sustainability by facilitating innovations in material selection and proportioning. This is particularly relevant now with increased interest in a broader set of minimally processed minerals for use as supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) or fillers; these are often industrial and agricultural byproducts and with limited performance history in concrete. This study compares traditional largely prescriptive concrete design, following practices currently allowed by the Georgia Department of Transportation, with three new concrete designs which do not comply with current specifications but offer increased sustainability. Three metrics are assessed for each mixture: the associated cradle-to-gate CO2 emissions, a metric that incorporates the environmental burden of concrete, compressive strength at 28 days, and surface resistivity measurements taken weekly from 28 to 56 days. A framework is proposed to statistically analyze compressive strength data to pre-qualify mix designs, which can be broadly applied to reduce time-consuming iterative testing and to help meet sustainable development goals. The aim is to foster innovation in material use and mixture design towards an increased durability and performance, while reducing environmental impact and minimizing risk.
Related References:
1. Lam, P. T. I., Kumaraswamy, M. M., and Ng, T. S. T. “A comparative study of user perceptions on prescriptive specifications versus performance-based specifications,” 19th Annual ARCOM Conference, V. 1, 2003, pp. 121–30.
2. Beushausen, H., and Fernandez Luco, L., eds. “Performance-Based Specifications and Control of Concrete Durability: State-of-the-Art Report RILEM TC 230-PSC,” v. vol. 18, Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands, 2016.
3. Swamy, R. N. “Sustainable Concrete for the 21st Century Concept of Strength through Durability,” Japan Society of Civil Engineers Concrete Committee Newsletter, V. 13, 2008.
4. Mehta, P. K., and Monteiro, P. J. M. “Concrete Microstructure, Properties and Materials,” 2017.
5. Alexander, M., and Thomas, M. “Service life prediction and performance testing — Current developments and practical applications,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 78, 2015, pp. 155–64.
6. Alexander, M., and Beushausen, H. “Durability, service life prediction, and modelling for reinforced concrete structures – review and critique,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 122, 2019, pp. 17–29.
7. Rios, R. T., Lolli, F., Xie, L., et al. “Screening candidate supplementary cementitious materials under standard and accelerated curing through time-series surface resistivity measurements and change-point detection,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 148, 2021, p. 106538.
8. Nadelman, E. I., and Kurtis, K. E. “A resistivity-based approach to optimizing concrete performance,” Concrete international, V. 36, No. 5, 2014, pp. 50–54.
9. Muni, H., Dhandapani, Y., Vignesh, K., et al. “Anomalous Early Increase in Concrete Resistivity with Calcined Clay Binders.” In: Bishnoi, S., ed. Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete. Singapore, Springer, 2020. pp. 749–57.
10. Noushini, A., and Castel, A. “The effect of heat-curing on transport properties of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 112, 2016, pp. 464–77.
11. Lobo, C., Lemay, L., and Obla, K. “Performance-Based Specifications for Concrete,” 2012, pp. 1–13.
12. “GNR Project.” Available at: https://gccassociation.org/gnr/. Accessed October 20, 2021.
13. “ASTM C618-19: Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete,” West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM International, 2019.
14. climateanalytics. “EU Coal Power Plants.” CARTO. Available at: https://climateanalytics.carto.com/builder/639b754a-dcd1-11e6-810c-0e98b61680bf/embed. Accessed October 20, 2021.
15. “Mapped: The world’s coal power plants in 2020.” Carbon Brief. Available at: https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants. Accessed October 20, 2021.
16. Georgia Department of Transportation. “Section 430 Portland Cement Concrete Pavement,” Atlanta, GA, USA, 2021.
17. Georgia Department of Transportation. “Section 439 Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (Special),” Atlanta, GA, USA, 2021.
18. Georgia Department of Transportation. “Section 500 Concrete Structures,” Atlanta, GA, USA, 2021.
19. “ASTM D7348: Test Methods for Loss on Ignition (LOI) of Solid Combustion Residues,” West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM International, n.d.
20. Smith, S. H., and Durham, S. A. “A cradle to gate LCA framework for emissions and energy reduction in concrete pavement mixture design,” International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, V. 5, No. 1, 2016, pp. 23–33.
21. Tait, M. W., and Cheung, W. M. “A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs,” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, V. 21, No. 6, 2016, pp. 847–60.
22. Stoiber, N., Hammerl, M., and Kromoser, B. “Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of CFRP reinforcement for concrete structures: Calculation basis and exemplary application,” Journal of Cleaner Production, V. 280, 2021, p. 124300.
23. Marceau, M. L., Nisbet, M. A., and VanGeem, M. G. “Life Cycle Inventory of Portland Cement Concrete,” n.d., p. 120.
24. “Clays Statistics and Information.” Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/nmic/clays-statistics-andinformation.
Accessed October 25, 2021.
25. Habert, G., and Ouellet-Plamondon, C. “Recent update on the environmental impact of geopolymers,” RILEM Technical Letters, V. 1, 2016, pp. 17–23.
26. Zaribaf, B. H., Uzal, B., and Kurtis, K. “Compatibility of Superplasticizers with Limestone-Metakaolin Blended Cementitious System.” In: Scrivener, K., Favier, A., eds. Calcined Clays for Sustainable Concrete. Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands, 2015. pp. 427–34.
27. Van den Heede, P., and De Belie, N. “Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional and ‘green’ concretes: Literature review and theoretical calculations,” Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 34, No. 4, 2012, pp. 431–42.
28. “EIA - State Electricity Profiles.” Available at: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/georgia/. Accessed October 14, 2021.
29. “ASTM C192/C192M-18: Standard Practice for Making Concrete Test Specimens in the Laboratory,” West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM International, 2018.
30. “ASTM C39-21: Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM International, 2021.
31. Freedman, D., and Diaconis, P. “On the histogram as a density estimator:L2 theory,” Zeitschrift für Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie und Verwandte Gebiete, V. 57, No. 4, 1981, pp. 453–76.
32. Kvam, P. H., and Vidakovic, B. “Nonparametric Statistics with Applications to Science and Engineering,” John Wiley & Sons, 2007, 445 pp.
33. Massey, F. J. “The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Goodness of Fit,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, V. 46, No. 253, 1951, pp. 68–78.
34. Mirza, S. A., MacGregor, J. G., and Hatzinikolas, M. “Statistical Descriptions of Strength of Concrete,” Journal of the Structural Division, V. 105, No. 6, 1979, pp. 1021–37.
35. Tumidajski, P. J., Fiore, L., Khodabocus, T., et al. “Comparison of Weibull and normal distributions for concrete compressive strengths,” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, V. 33, No. 10, 2006, pp. 1287–92.
36. Lock, R. H., Lock, P. F., Morgan, K. L., et al. “Statistics: Unlocking the Power of Data,” John Wiley & Sons, 2020, 864 pp.
37. Wasserstein, R. L., and Lazar, N. A. “ASA Statement on Statistical Significance and p-Values.” In: Gruber, C. W., ed. The Theory of Statistics in Psychology: Applications, Use, and Misunderstandings. Cham, Springer International Publishing, 2020. pp. 1–10.
38. Christensen, B. J., Coverdale, T., Olson, R. A., et al. “Impedance Spectroscopy of Hydrating Cement-Based Materials: Measurement, Interpretation, and Application,” Journal of the American Ceramic Society, V. 77, No. 11, 1994, pp. 2789–804.
39. “AASHTO T358: Standard Method of Test for Surface Resistivity Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration.,” Washington, D.C., American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2017.
40. PCA, Portland Cement Association. “Carbon Footprint,” n.d.
41. Adams, M. P. “Concrete Solutions to Climate Change,” n.d., p. 20.
42. Chaimov, H. “Sustainability of Concrete in the Pacific Northwest.”
43. Seraj, S. “Evaluating natural pozzolans for use as alternative supplementary cementitious materials in concrete.” Thesis, 2014.
44. Kalina, R. D., Al-Shmaisani, S., Ferron, R. D., et al. “False Positives in ASTM C618 Specifications for Natural Pozzolans,” Materials Journal, V. 116, No. 1, 2019, pp. 165–72.
45. Mehta, P. K. “Pozzolanic and Cementitious Byproducts as Mineral Admixtures for Concrete - A Critical Review,” Special Publication, V. 79, 1983, pp. 1–46.
46. Biggers, R. B. “Development of a Surface Resistivity Specification for Durable Concrete.” M.S., The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, United States -- North Carolina, n.d.
47. Ping, X., Beaudoin, J. J., and Brousseau, R. “Flat aggregate-portland cement paste interfaces, I. Electrical conductivity models,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 21, No. 4, 1991, pp. 515–22.
48. Shi, C. “Effect of mixing proportions of concrete on its electrical conductivity and the rapid chloride permeability test (ASTM C1202 or ASSHTO T277) results,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 34, No. 3, 2004, pp. 537–45.