Analysis of alternative sustainable approach to concrete mixture design

Abstract

Sustainability is a growing area of concern, especially amid the concrete industry. Concrete, especially traditional concrete, which contains Portland cement, is extremely harmful to the environment producing mass amounts of carbon dioxide. Additionally, the harvesting of these materials, like lime, cause significant damage to waterways and the ecosystem. For years, studies have found numerous, more sustainable, alternatives that are structurally equivalent to traditional concrete. The Connecticut Department of Transportation does allow for the use of alternative “green” concretes as long as the mix designs meet the required specifications. Nevertheless, heavy highway construction seems reluctant to dabble with new substances and continues to falls back on the use of fly ash concrete. This solution, however, is not perfect, as fly ash is a finite material. By conducting a nationwide survey to the Departments of Transportation (DOT), the reliance on fly ash was evident. It was also found that the biggest concerns for DOTs would be the cost and availability of the material. This study investigates presently accepted alternative concrete mixture designs and also explores the solutions of volcanic ash concrete and ground glass concrete. Based off the results of the survey and practicality, this study suggests the incorporation of ground glass concrete for heavy highway construction. This solution provides the needed strength requirements per DOT specs and is within the same price-range as fly ash concrete.

Keywords

• Concrete
• Admixture
• Sustainability
• Fly-Ash
• Volcanic Ash

References

1. Larsen, D., Bernier, A., & Mahoney, J. (2020). Connecticut Annual Pavement Report. Bureau of Engineering and Construction Pavement Unit. Connecticut Department of Transportation.
2. Perera, F. (2018). Pollution from Fossil-Fuel Combustion is Leading Environmental Threat to Global Pediatric Health and Equity: Solution Exist. Int J Environ Res Public Health.
3. Kuo, G. (2019). When fossil fuels run out, what then? The Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB). Retrieved October 11, 2021, from The Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB): https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/fossil-fuels-run
4. Norton, S. (2011). Pavement Preservation Manual. Bureau of Engineering and Construction Pavement Unit. Connecticut Department of Transportation.
5. Berry, R. (2021). In 2020, U.S. Coal Production Fell to Its Lowest Level since 1965. U.S. Energy Information Administration - Today in Energy. Retrieved from U.S. Energy Information Administration: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48696
6. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics - Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage. (2021). NAICS 212100 - Coal Mining. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/oes/2020/may/naics4_212100.htm
7. Desjardins, J. (2019). Mapped: Every Power Plant in the United States. Energy. Retrieved 2022, from https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-every-power-plant-in-the-united-states/
8. Lauren, B. (2015). Southeastern plants moving away from coal before EPA deadline. SNL Enery Power Daily.

9. Horwath, J. (2020). Michigan town shuts power plant after running out of coal. SNL Canada Energy Week.
10. Reaver, N. G., & Khare, S. V. (2014). Imminence of peak in US coal production and overestimation of reserves. International Journal of Coal Geology, 90-105.
11. Damtoft, J., Lukasik, J., Herfort, D., Sorrentino, D., & Gartner, E. (2008). Sustainable Development and Climate Change Initiatives. Cement and Concrete Research, 38(2), 115-127.
12. Watts, J. (2019). Concrete: The Most Destructive Material on Earth. The Guardian, p. 25.
13. Vishwakarma, V., & Ramachandran, D. (2018). Green Concrete Mix Using Solid Waste and Nanoparticles as Alternatives – A Review. Construction & Building Materials, 162, 96-103.
14. Behera, M., Bhattacharyya, S., Minocha, A., Deoliya, R., & Maiti, S. (2014). Recycled Aggregate from C&D Waste & Its Use in Concrete – A Breakthrough towards Sustainability in Construction Sector: A Review. Construction & Building Materials, 68, 501-516.
15. Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology- Coal Fly Ash. (2016). (Publication Number: FHWA-RD-97-148) Retrieved from FHWADOT: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/structures/97148/cfa53.cfm
16. Section M.03 Portland Cement Concrete. (2022). (Connecticut Department of Transportation) Retrieved from Connecticut Department of Transportation: https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CONNDOT/SECTION-M03
17. Section 4.01 Concrete Pavement. (2006). (Connecticut Department of Transportation) Retrieved from Connecticut Department of Transportation: https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CONNDOT/SECTION-401
18. Boral Resources. (2021). Retrieved from Boral Resources: https://flyash.com/
19. Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete. (2019). (ASTM International) Retrieved from ASTM International: https://www.astm.org/c0618-19.html
20. Karasin, A., & Dogruyol, M. (2014). An Experimental Study on Strength and Durability for Utilization of Fly Ash in Concrete Mix. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, pp. 1-6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/417514
21. Liu, L., Wang, L., & Gong, Y. (2019). Strength time-varying and freeze-thaw durability of sustainable pervious concrete pavement material containing waste fly ash. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 11(1), 176. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su110101
22. Thomas, M. (2007). Optimizing the Use of Fly Ash in Concrete. Portland Cement Association.
23. Zhai, T., Chen, S., Chen, H., & Cheng, B. (2021). Experimental Research on Durability of Fly Ash Pavement Concrete and Mix Proportion Optimization. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2
24. Gioietta, K. (2019). When fossil fuels run out, what then? Retrieved October 11, 2021, from MAHB: https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/fossil-fuels-run
25. Sutter, L. L., Vruno, D. M., Anzalone, G. C., & Dong, J. (2014). Laboratory Study for Comparison of Class C Versus Class F FLy Ash for Concrete Pavement. Michigan Techological University, 1-154.
26. Cai, G., Noguchi, T., Degee, H., Zhao, J., & Kitagaki, R. (2016). Volcano-related materials in concretes: A comprehensive review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 23(8), 7220-7243. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-6161-z
27. Jativa, A., Ruales, E., & Etxeberria, M. (2021). Volcanic Ash as a Sustainable Binder Material: An Extensive Review. Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 14(5), 1302.
28. Robayo-Salazar, R., Mejia-Arcila, J., Mejia de Gutierrez, R., & Martinez, E. (2018). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of an alkali-activated binary concrete based on natural volcanic pozzolan: A comparative analysis to OPC concrete. Construction Building Materials, 103-111.
29. Susanti, D., Tambunan, R., Waruwu, A., & Syamsuddin, M. (2018). Studies on concrete by partial replacement of cement with volcanic ash. Journal of Applied Engineering Science Vol. 16, br. 2, 161-165.
30. Hossain, K. M., & Lachemi, M. (2010). Fresh, Mechanical, and Durability Characteristics of Self-Consolidating Concrete Incorporating Volcanic Ash. Jounal of Materials in Civil Engineering Vol 22 Issue 7.
31. Zhiguo, C. Z. (2009). Research on Pavement Performance of Volcanic Ash Mixture as Road Base and Mechanism. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research Volume 4 Issue 1.
32. Guignone, V. G., Zulcao, R., Degen, M., de Moraes Mittri, S., & Baptista, G. (2020). Incorporation of glass powder and metakaolin as cement partial replacement to improve concrete mechanical properties and increase service life. Journal of Composite Materials, 54(21), 2965-2983. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998320906873
33. Mohammed, Z. M. (2022). Behavior of sustainable Reactive Powder Concrete by Using Glass Powder as a Replacement of Cement. . IOP Conference Series. Earth and Environmental Science, 961(1), 012022. doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/961/1/012022
34. Khudair, A., Al-Ani, M., & Hama, S. (2020). Optimization of glass powder content in self-compacting concrete as partial replacement of cement. Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering.
35. Rashidian, D., & Rao Rangaraju, P. (2018). Evaluation of Selected Durability Properties of Portland Cement Concretes Containing Ground Glass Fiber as a Pozzolan. Transportation Research Record, 2672(27), 88-89. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/036119
36. Paiva, H., Velosa, A., Cachim, P., & Ferreira, V. (2016). Effect of pozzolans with different physical and chemical characteristics on concrete properties. Materiales De Construcción, 66(32). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/mc.2016.01815
37. Schrofl, C., Gruber, M., & Plank, J. (2012). Preferential adsorption of polycarboxylate superplasticizers on cement and silica fume in ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC). Cement and Concrete Research Vol 42 Issue 11, 1401-1408.
38. Tkach, E., Rudoy, D., & Murgul, V. (2019 ). Improvement of the modified heavy concrete properties based on the use of activated silica fume. Web of Confrences vol 135, 3208.
39. Koksal, F., Altun, F., Yigit, I., & Sahin, Y. (2008). Combined effect of silica fume and steel fiber on the mechanical properties of high strength concretes. Construction & Building Materials Vol 22 Issue 8, 1874-1880.
40. Azunna, S. U., Aziz, F. N., Cun, P. M., & Elhibir, M. M. (2019). Characterization of lightweight cement concrete with partial replacement of coconut shell fine aggregate. Applied Sciences, 1(6), 1-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0629-7
41. Dehwah, H. (2012). Mechanical Properties of Self-Compacting Concrete incorporating Quarry Dust Powder, Slica Fume, or Fly Ash. Construction & Building Materials, 26, 547-551.
42. Jin, R., Chen, Q., & Soboyejo, A. (2015). Survey of the current status of sustainable concrete production in the U.S. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 105, 148-159.
43. PCA America's Cement Manufacturers. (2019). Chemical Admixtures. Retrieved from https://www.cement.org/cement-concrete/concrete-materials/chemical-admixtures