IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i18p11181-d908710.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Mechanical Behavior of Sustainable Concrete Using Raw and Processed Sugarcane Bagasse Ash

Author

Listed:
  • Amr El-said

    (Department of Civil Engineering, The Higher Institute of Engineering, El Shrouk, Cairo 11837, Egypt)

  • Ahmed Awad

    (Faculty of Engineering, October University for Modern Sciences and Arts, Giza 12451, Egypt)

  • Mahmood Ahmad

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar (Bannu Campus), Bannu 28100, Pakistan)

  • Mohanad Muayad Sabri Sabri

    (Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 St. Petersburg, Russia)

  • Ahmed Farouk Deifalla

    (Structural Engineering and Construction Management Department, Future University in Engineering, Cairo 11835, Egypt)

  • Maged Tawfik

    (Department of Civil Engineering, The Higher Institute of Engineering, El Shrouk, Cairo 11837, Egypt)

Abstract

Sugarcane Bagasse Ash (SCBA) is one of the most common types of agricultural waste. By its availability and pozzolanic properties, sugarcane bagasse ash can be utilized as a partial replacement for cement in the production of sustainable concrete. This study experimentally investigated the impact of employing two types of sugarcane bagasse ash as a partial substitute for cement up to 30% on the compressive strength, flexural strength, and Young’s modulus of the concrete mixture. The first type of bagasse ash used was raw SCBA, which was used as it arrived from the plant, with the same characteristics, considering that it was exposed to a temperature of 600 °C in the boilers to generate energy. The second type of bagasse ash utilized, called processed SCBA, was produced by regrinding raw SCBA for an hour and then burning it again for two hours at a temperature of 600 °C. This was done to improve the pozzolanic activity and consequently the mechanical properties of the concrete mixture. The findings indicated that employing raw sugarcane bagasse ash had a detrimental effect on the mechanical characteristics of the concrete mixture but using processed sugarcane bagasse ash at a proportion of no more than 10% had a considerable effect on improving the properties of the concrete mixture. The utilization of processed SCBA up to 10% into the concrete mixture resulted in a 12%, 8%, and 8% increase in compressive strength, flexural strength, and Young’s modulus, respectively, compared to the normal concrete specimen. On the contrary, the inclusion of raw SCBA with varying content into the concrete mixture decreased compressive strength, flexural strength, and Young’s modulus by up to 50%, 30%, and 29%, respectively, compared to the normal concrete specimen. The experimental findings were validated by comparison with ACI predictions. ACI overestimated the flexural strength of SCBA concrete specimens, with a mean coefficient of difference between the ACI equation and experimental results of 22%, however, ACI underestimated the Young’s modulus of SCBA concrete specimens, with a mean coefficient of difference between the ACI equation and experimental results of −6%.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11181-:d:908710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11181/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11181/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammad Mehdi Roshani & Seyed Hamidreza Kargar & Visar Farhangi & Moses Karakouzian, 2021. "Predicting the Effect of Fly Ash on Concrete’s Mechanical Properties by ANN," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Richard Heede, 2014. "Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 229-241, January.
    3. 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)

    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. 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.
    4. Peter Frumhoff & Richard Heede & Naomi Oreskes, 2015. "The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 157-171, September.
    5. Jacob Hörisch & Jana Kollat & Steven A. Brieger, 2017. "What influences environmental entrepreneurship? A multilevel analysis of the determinants of entrepreneurs’ environmental orientation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 47-69, January.
    6. Pottier, Antonin & Combet, Emmanuel & Cayla, Jean-Michel & de Lauretis, Simona & Nadaud, Franck, 2021. "Who emits CO2 ? Landscape of ecological inequalities in France from a critical perspective," FEEM Working Papers 311053, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Oliver Lazarus & Sonali McDermid & Jennifer Jacquet, 2021. "The climate responsibilities of industrial meat and dairy producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-21, March.
    8. Hörisch, Jacob & Ortas, Eduardo & Schaltegger, Stefan & Álvarez, Igor, 2015. "Environmental effects of sustainability management tools: An empirical analysis of large companies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 241-249.
    9. Haiyun, Cui & Zhixiong, Huang & Yüksel, Serhat & Dinçer, Hasan, 2021. "Analysis of the innovation strategies for green supply chain management in the energy industry using the QFD-based hybrid interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy decision approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    10. Jacob Hileman & Ivan Kallstenius & Tiina Häyhä & Celinda Palm & Sarah Cornell, 2020. "Keystone actors do not act alone: A business ecosystem perspective on sustainability in the global clothing industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, October.
    11. Gerard Farias & Christine Farias & Isabella Krysa & Joel Harmon, 2020. "Sustainability Mindsets for Strategic Management: Lifting the Yoke of the Neo-Classical Economic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-14, August.
    12. Tim Mulgan, 2019. "Corporate Agency and Possible Futures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(4), pages 901-916, February.
    13. Ploy Achakulwisut & Peter Erickson & Céline Guivarch & Roberto Schaeffer & Elina Brutschin & Steve Pye, 2023. "Global fossil fuel reduction pathways under different climate mitigation strategies and ambitions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Jayme Walenta, 2020. "Climate risk assessments and science‐based targets: A review of emerging private sector climate action tools," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), March.
    15. Aastvedt, Tonje Marthinsen & Behmiri, Niaz Bashiri & Lu, Li, 2021. "Does green innovation damage financial performance of oil and gas companies?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    16. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. Nawaf S. Alhajeri & Fahad M. Al-Fadhli & Ahmed Z. Aly, 2019. "Unit-Based Emissions Inventory for Electric Power Systems in Kuwait: Current Status and Future Predictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Scoville-Simonds, Morgan & Jamali, Hameed & Hufty, Marc, 2020. "The Hazards of Mainstreaming: Climate change adaptation politics in three dimensions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Muhammad Imran & Azlan Zahid & Salma Mouneer & Orhan Özçatalbaş & Shamsheer Ul Haq & Pomi Shahbaz & Muhammad Muzammil & Muhammad Ramiz Murtaza, 2022. "Relationship between Household Dynamics, Biomass Consumption, and Carbon Emissions in Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, May.
    20. Edward B. Barbier & Joanne C. Burgess, 2017. "Innovative Corporate Initiatives to Reduce Climate Risk: Lessons from East Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, December.

    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:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11181-:d:908710. 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.