Title:
Enhancing the Journey towards Concrete Net Zero: The Role of Eco-Efficient Concrete, Particle Packing Models, and Limestone Fillers
Author(s):
M.T. de Grazia and L.F.M. Sanchez
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
362
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
901-915
Keywords:
limestone fillers (LF), particle packing models (PPM), low-carbon concrete, global warming potential, CO2 intensity index, and binder intensity (bi) index
DOI:
10.14359/51742017
Date:
6/18/2024
Abstract:
In recent years, there has been a growing need to develop eco-efficient concrete with reduced cement content for sustainable construction practices. This paper aims to highlight the importance of the concrete net zero goal by 2050 and explore how concrete particle-packing models and limestone fillers can contribute to achieving sustainable targets. Four eco-efficient concrete mixtures with varying cement content (320, 250, 200, and 150 kg/m3) were developed. A comprehensive analysis of the hardened state properties, including surface electrical resistivity, compressive strength, and modulus of elasticity, was conducted over time for each mixture. Furthermore, this paper briefly discusses methods to analyze concrete eco-efficiency and their impact on global warming. The results presented in this study contribute to the understanding of the importance of concrete eco-efficiency and provide insights for engineers and researchers on how to evaluate concrete eco-efficiency.
Related References:
1. Watari, T., Cao, Z., Hata, S., et al. 2022. Efficient use of cement and concrete to reduce reliance on supply-side technologies for net-zero emissions, Nature communications, 13(1), 4158–4158.
2. Di Filippo, J., Karpman, J., Deshazo, J. R., et al. 2019. The impacts of policies to reduce CO2 emissions within the concrete supply chain, Cement and Concrete Composites, 101(June 2017), 67–82.
3. Turner, L. K., and Collins, F. G. 2013. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: A comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete, Construction and Building Materials, 43125–30.
4. Science, S., Series, N., and Oct, N. 2014. Complex Visual Concept in the Pigeon Author (s ): R . J . Herrnstein and D . H . Loveland Published by : American Association for the Advancement of Science Stable URL : http://www.jstor.org/stable/1714350 . Complex
Visual Concept in, 146(3643), 549–51.
5. Ruan, S., and Unluer, C. 2017. Influence of supplementary cementitious materials on the performance and environmental impacts of reactive magnesia cement concrete, Journal of Cleaner Production, 15962–73.
6. Matos, P. R. de., Sakata, R. D., and Prudêncio, L. R. 2019. Eco-efficient low binder highperformance self-compacting concretes, Construction and Building Materials, 225941–55.
7. M. C. G. Juenger., and R. Siddique. 2015. Recent advances in understanding the role of supplementary cementitious materials in concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, 7871–80.
8. Pacheco Torgal, F., Miraldo, S., Labrincha, J. A., et al. 2012. An overview on concrete carbonation in the context of eco-efficient construction: Evaluation, use of SCMs and/or RAC, Construction and Building Materials, 36141–50.
9. Bouzoubaâ, N., and Fournier, B. 2005. Current situation with the production and use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) in concrete construction in Canada, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 32(1), 129–43.
10. Zachar, J., and Asce, M. 2011. Sustainable and Economical Precast and Prestressed Concrete Using Fly Ash as a Cement Replacement, J. Mat. in Civil Engineering, 23(6), 789–92.
11. Juenger, M. C. G., and Siddique, R. 2015. Recent advances in understanding the role of supplementary cementitious materials in concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, 7871–80.
12. Environment, U. N., Scrivener, K. L., John, V. M., et al. 2018. Eco-efficient cements: Potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement-based materials industry, Cement and Concrete Research, 114(2–26), .
13. Kang, S. H., Jeong, Y., Tan, K. H., et al. 2019. High-volume use of limestone in ultra-high performance fiber-reinforced concrete for reducing cement content and autogenous shrinkage, Construction and Building Materials, 213292–305.
14. John, V. M., Damineli, B. L., Quattrone, M., et al. 2018. Fillers in cementitious materials — Experience, recent advances and future potential, Cement and Concrete Research, 11465–78.
15. Bonavetti, V., Donza, H., Menéndez, G., et al. 2003. Limestone filler cement in low w/c concrete: A rational use of energy, Cement and Concrete Research, 33(6), 865–71.
16. T. de Grazia, M., F. M. Sanchez, L., C. O. Romano, R., et al. 2019. Investigation of the use of continuous particle packing models (PPMs) on the fresh and hardened properties of low-cement concrete (LCC) systems, Construction and Building Materials, 195524–36.
17. Tikkanen, J., Cwirzen, A., and Penttala, V. 2014. Effects of mineral powders on hydration process and hydration products in normal strength concrete, Construction and Building Materials, 727–14.
18. Oey, T., Kumar, A., Bullard, J. W., et al. 2013. The filler effect: The influence of filler content and surface area on cementitious reaction rates, Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 96(6), 1978–90.
19. Lothenbach, B., Scrivener, K., and Hooton, R. D. 2011. Supplementary cementitious materials, Cement and Concrete Research, 41(12), 217–29.
20. Youness, D., Hosseinpoor, M., Yahia, A., et al. 2021. Flowability characteristics of dry supplementary cementitious materials using Carr measurements and their effect on the rheology of suspensions, Powder Technology, 378124–44.
21. Lothenbach, B., Le Saout, G., Gallucci, E., et al. 2008. Influence of limestone on the hydration of Portland cements, Cement and Concrete Research, 38848–60.
22. Noël, M., Sanchez, L., and Fathifazl, G. “Recent Advances in Sustainable Concrete for Structural Applications.” Sustainable Construction Materials & Technologies 4. 2016. p. 10.
23. “Joint statement: Canada’s Cement Industry and the Government of Canada announce a partnership to establish Canada as a global leader in low-carbon cement and to achieve net-zero carbon concrete - Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada.” Available at: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/07730.html. Accessed March 17, 2022.
24. GCCA. “Our path to net zero.” Available at: https://gccassociation.org/concretefuture/ourpath-to-net-zero/. Accessed March 17, 2022.
25. Wallevik, O. H., Mansour, W. I., Yazbeck, F. H., et al. 2014. EcoCrete-Xtreme: Extreme performance of a sustainable concrete, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Eco-Crete, (October), 3–10.
26. Ali, Z. S., Hosseinpoor, M., and Yahia, A. 2020. New aggregate grading models for lowbinder self-consolidating and semi-self-consolidating concrete (Eco-SCC and Eco-semi-SCC), Construction and Building Materials, 265120314.
27. Esmaeilkhanian, B., Khayat, K. H., and Wallevik, O. H. 2017. Mix design approach for low-powder self-consolidating concrete: Eco-SCC-content optimization and performance, Materials and Structures, 50(124), 18.
28. Damineli, B. L., Kemeid, F. M., Aguiar, P. S., et al. 2010. Measuring the eco-efficiency of cement use, Cement and Concrete Composites, 32(8), 555–562.
29. Kurad, R., Silvestre, J. D., de Brito, J., et al. 2017. Effect of incorporation of high volume of recycled concrete aggregates and fly ash on the strength and global warming potential of concrete, Journal of Cleaner Production, 166485–502.
30. Nguyen, W., Martinez, D. M., Jen, G., et al. 2021. Interaction between global warming potential, durability, and structural properties of fiber-reinforced concrete with high waste materials inclusion, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 169(December 2020), 105453.
31. Sahraei Moghadam, A., Omidinasab, F., and Moazami Goodarzi, S. 2021. Characterization of concrete containing RCA and GGBFS: Mechanical, microstructural and environmental properties, Construction and Building Materials, 289123134.
32. Kumar, S., Santhanam, M., Kunar, S., et al. 2003. Particle packing theories and their application in concrete mixture proportioning : A review, The Indian Concrete Journal, 771324–31.
33. Kwan, A. K. H., Chan, K. W., and Wong, V. 2013. A 3-parameter particle packing model incorporating the wedging effect, Powder Technology, 237172–9.
34. Baghaee Moghaddam, T., and Baaj, H. 2018. Application of compressible packing model for optimization of asphalt concrete mix design, Construction and Building Materials, 159530–9.
35. Fennis, S. A. A. M., Walraven, J. C., and den Uijl, J. A. 2013. Compaction-interaction packing model: regarding the effect of fillers in concrete mixture design, Materials and Structures, 46(3), 463–78.
36. Hunger, M., and Brouwers, H. J. H. 2009. Flow analysis of water–powder mixtures: Application to specific surface area and shape factor, Cement and Concrete Composites, 3139–59.
37. Dinger, D., and Funk, J. “Predictive process control of crowded particulate suspensions,” 1st edition, New York, 1994.
38. ASTM C39. “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” 1999.
39. ASTM C469. “Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio of Concrete in Compression,” 2017.
40. V. Deda, H., F. M. Sanchez, L., and T. De Grazia, M. “The Influence of the Binder and Aggregate Type on Concrete Electrical Resistivity.” 11th ACI/RILEM International Conference on Cementitious Materials and Alternative Binders for Sustainable Concrete. 2021. pp. 237–55.