IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8621-d607092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Durability Performance of SCC and SCGC Containing Recycled Concrete Aggregates: A Comparative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Tehmina Ayub

    (Department of Civil Engineering, NED University of Engineering and Technology, Karachi 75270, Pakistan)

  • Wajeeha Mahmood

    (Department of Civil Engineering, NED University of Engineering and Technology, Karachi 75270, Pakistan)

  • Asad-ur-Rehman Khan

    (Department of Civil Engineering, NED University of Engineering and Technology, Karachi 75270, Pakistan)

Abstract

This study assesses the behaviour of self-compacting geopolymer concrete (SCGC) with and without recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) by studying the rheological, mechanical and durability properties and comparison with self-compacting concrete (SCC). The idea of using RCA in geopolymer is to attain sustainable development goals, i.e., with less carbon footprint and the use of waste materials such as fly ash and RCA. Two types of concretes were prepared, namely “self-compacting concrete (SCC)” and “self-compacting geopolymer concrete (SCGC)”. Using each concrete type, two design mixes were prepared. The first mix contained 100% natural coarse aggregates (NCA), whereas, in the second mix, 30% NCA were replaced with RCA. The result of rheological properties indicated that the viscosity, passing ability, and segregation results of SCC and SCGC mixes were higher when NCA was partially replaced with RCA. Results of mechanical properties indicated that the increase in the compressive strength of the control mix of SCC (denoted as SCC-0) and SCGC mix (denoted as SCGC-0) at 28 days was 38.3% and 33.1% higher than those containing 30% RCA (denoted as SCC-30 and SCGC-30), respectively. The percentage increase in the compressive strength of SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes was 20.24% and 13.45% higher compared to SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes. The increase in the split tensile strength of SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes was 9% and 21.74% higher than SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes. The split tensile strength of control mixes SCC-0 and SCGC-0 is 47.73% and 55% higher than SCC-30 and SCGC-30 at 28 days, respectively. Durability performance of SCC and SCGC mixes was investigated by performing hydraulic permeability, accelerated carbonation, half-cell potential and pull-out tests at 28, 90, 180, 365, and 720 days, and were found inferior for SCGC mixes. The water penetration depth of SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes was 5.71% to 16.1% and 10% to 18.6% higher than SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes at 28 to 720 days. The carbonation depth in SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes was 8.11% to 20.83% and 7.89% to 13.73% higher than SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes at 28 to 720 days. The half-cell potential difference results for SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes were 27.5% to 50% and 8.3% to 16.41% higher than SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes at 28 to 720 days. The pull-out strength of SCC-0 and SCC-30 mixes was 11.36% to 29.5% and 8.3% to 38.97% higher than SCGC-0 and SCGC-30 mixes at 28 to 720 days, respectively. Overall, the mechanical and durability properties of SCC mixes were better than SCGC at the same exposure period.

Suggested Citation

  • Tehmina Ayub & Wajeeha Mahmood & Asad-ur-Rehman Khan, 2021. "Durability Performance of SCC and SCGC Containing Recycled Concrete Aggregates: A Comparative Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8621-:d:607092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8621/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8621/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ali Naqi & Jeong Gook Jang, 2019. "Recent Progress in Green Cement Technology Utilizing Low-Carbon Emission Fuels and Raw Materials: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shirong Yan & Binglei Wang & Yu Sun & Boning Lyu, 2021. "Micromechanics-Based Prediction Models and Experimental Validation on Elastic Modulus of Recycled Aggregate Concrete," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-13, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuanhuang Wang & Zheng Lu & Dianchao Wang & Qihang Tan & Weiwei Wu & Liming Zhu, 2023. "Influence of Recycled Cement Paste Powder on Early-Age Plastic Shrinkage and Cracking of Cement-Based Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Stančin, H. & Mikulčić, H. & Wang, X. & Duić, N., 2020. "A review on alternative fuels in future energy system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    3. Andras Fehervari & Will P. Gates & Chathuranga Gallage & Frank Collins, 2020. "Suitability of Remediated PFAS-Affected Soil in Cement Pastes and Mortars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Wei Chen & Jiusu Li, 2023. "Effects of Different Silicon Sources on the Properties of Geopolymer Planting Concrete Mixed with Red Mud," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Selvadurai Sebastin & Arun Kumar Priya & Alagar Karthick & Ravishankar Sathyamurthy & Aritra Ghosh, 2020. "Agro Waste Sugarcane Bagasse as a Cementitious Material for Reactive Powder Concrete," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Jongyeol Lee & Changsun Jang & Kyung Nam Shin & Ji Whan Ahn, 2019. "Strategy of Developing Innovative Technology for Sustainable Cities: The Case of the National Strategic Project on Carbon Mineralization in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-11, July.
    7. Rhoda Afriyie Mensah & Vigneshwaran Shanmugam & Sreenivasan Narayanan & Nima Razavi & Adrian Ulfberg & Thomas Blanksvärd & Faez Sayahi & Peter Simonsson & Benjamin Reinke & Michael Försth & Gabriel Sa, 2021. "Biochar-Added Cementitious Materials—A Review on Mechanical, Thermal, and Environmental Properties," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-27, August.
    8. Amr El-said & Ahmed Awad & Mahmood Ahmad & Mohanad Muayad Sabri Sabri & Ahmed Farouk Deifalla & Maged Tawfik, 2022. "The Mechanical Behavior of Sustainable Concrete Using Raw and Processed Sugarcane Bagasse Ash," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    9. Kiem Pham Van & Huong Tran Thi Thu & Thu Trang Pham & Khac Huy Nguyen & Phuong Thao Vu, 2023. "Application of Low-Carbon Measures in Logistics Service Providers in Vietnam: A Comparative Study between Domestic and Foreign-Invested Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Simge Çankaya, 2020. "Investigating the environmental impacts of alternative fuel usage in cement production: a life cycle approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7495-7514, December.
    11. Sigurjónsson, Hafþór Ægir & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Bogason, Sigurður G., 2021. "A life-cycle analysis of deep enhanced geothermal systems – The case studies of Reykjanes, Iceland and Vendenheim, France," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1076-1086.
    12. Jing Cao & Fangyi Liu & Siyang Huang & Hong Liu & Zhigang Song & Jianyun Li & Guoshou Liu, 2023. "Effect of UFC on the Microscopic Pore Structure of Cemented Soil in Humic Acid Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Bangwen Lu & Changwu Liu & Jungang Guo & Naiqi Feng, 2023. "Study on Physical and Mechanical Properties of High-Water Material Made by Seawater," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, February.
    14. Kusuma, Ravi Teja & Hiremath, Rahul B. & Rajesh, Pachimatla & Kumar, Bimlesh & Renukappa, Suresh, 2022. "Sustainable transition towards biomass-based cement industry: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    15. Quan Guo & Zijing Liang & Xiang Bai & Mengnan Lv & Anying Zhang, 2022. "The Analysis of Carbon Emission’s Characteristics and Dynamic Evolution Based on the Strategy of Unbalanced Regional Economic Development in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-31, July.
    16. Thirumalini Selvaraj & Shanmugapriya T & Senthil Kumar Kaliyavaradhan & Kunal Kakria & Ravi Chandra Malladi, 2022. "Use of E-Waste in Metakaolin Blended Cement Concrete for Sustainable Construction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.
    17. Jaroslav Vrchota & Martin Pech & Ladislav Rolínek & Jiří Bednář, 2020. "Sustainability Outcomes of Green Processes in Relation to Industry 4.0 in Manufacturing: Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-47, July.
    18. Lubinda F. Walubita & Gilberto Martinez-Arguelles & Rodrigo Polo-Mendoza & Sang Ick-Lee & Luis Fuentes, 2022. "Comparative Environmental Assessment of Rigid, Flexible, and Perpetual Pavements: A Case Study of Texas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-22, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8621-:d:607092. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.