Production of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete with Low Energy Consumption and Carbon Footprint Using Supplementary Cementitious Materials Instead of Silica Fume: A Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Critical Evaluation of State-of-Art
2.1. Utilization of FA in the Production of UHPC
Critical Evaluation of FA-Based UHPC
2.2. Utilization of GGBS in the Production of UHPC
Critical Evaluation GGBS-Based UHPC
2.3. Utilization of MK in the Production of UHPC
Critical Evaluation of MK-Based UHPC
2.4. Utilization of RHA in the Production of UHPC
Critical Evaluation of RHA-Based UHPC
2.5. Carbon Footprint and Energy Consumption of Mineral Admixtures-Based Concrete
3. Discussion
4. Conclusions
- There are few studies that have dealt with carbon dioxide emissions and the energy consumed for SCMs in the manufacture of UHPC, taking into account materials manufacturing processes, the resulted compressive strength, the curing used and other details of concrete.
- Among the SCMs that have been studied, GGBS can be considered the lowest environmentally impactful in the manufacture of UHPC. The carbon dioxide emissions are significantly reduced with the combined use of GGBS, FA and SF.
- The grain particle size and accelerating curing are important parameters in FA-based UHPC.
- The FA is usually utilized together with SF or GGBS in the production of UHPC, in order to compensate for the slow strengths development of FA at early ages.
- There is a scarcity of information about the comparison in the behavior between the two types of FA (Type C and F) under the impact of different curing systems.
- From an environmental point of view and to reduce the cost of concrete, UHPC with compressive strengths of not less than 150 MPa can be produced by combination FA + SF (as cement replacement materials) in the percentages of (40% + 5.5%) under steam curing or (20%+5%) or under standard curing, respectively.
- The GGBS can be utilized together with SF in the production of UHPC with better performance and environmental characteristics than SF alone. The recommended combination dosage ranged from 1.2 to 2 (by weight of cement for both materials).
- There is an optimum fineness of GGBS when utilized with SF in UHPC, beyond and before it, the strengths are reduced from its maximum value.
- The accelerated curing can increase the replacement level of cement with GGBS in UHPC. Nevertheless, if an appropriate mix proportion is utilized, utilizing normal curing for cost-end energy reduction purposes is considered satisfactory.
- The SF has better performance than MK in the production of UHPC.
- The compressive strengths/cost per 1 m3 and the material/cement packing density should be taken into account when making a comparison between SCMs in the production of UHPC.
- The cement could be substituted with MK in a proportion of 25% (by weight) to produce UHPC with an equivalent or a slight reduction in the mechanical performance compared to SF.
- RHA can replace SF partially or completely in UHPC, as a result of its promising performance in hardened and fresh characteristics and its similar chemical composition.
- The internal curing characteristic of RHA has made it superior to the performance of SF in later ages in terms of strengths development and shrinkage reduction.
- The combination of RHA and SF (10% for each material) can give a better performance than if each substance was utilized separately.
- In comparison to all SCMs investigated in this review, SF had the highest strength among these materials (at the same replacement level) except for RHA. Their combinations with SF or applying accelerated curing may limit strength reduction, or even recover it. Nevertheless, the other benefits such as the possibility of using high substitution ratios of these materials with cement, cost reduction and improving the environment should be taken into account during the comparison.
5. Recommendations for Future Works
- Studying the long-term performance of UHPC made from SCMs other than SF.
- Investigation of the impact of using a high volume fraction of RHA on different characteristics of UHPC.
- Examining the alkalinity of the produced UHPC made with high content of SCMs, which is affected by calcium hydroxide depletion.
- Performing comprehensive life cycle assessment for UHPC regarding the different types of SCMs.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wang, X.; Yu, R.; Shui, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Song, Q.; Yang, B.; Fan, D. Development of a novel cleaner construction product: Ultra-high performance concrete incorporating lead-zinc tailings. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 196, 172–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Tuan, N.; Ye, G.; Van Breugel, K.; Fraaij, A.L.A.; Dai Bui, D. The study of using rice husk ash to produce ultra high performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 2030–2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, C.; Wu, Z.; Xiao, J.; Wang, D.; Huang, Z.; Fang, Z. A review on ultra high performance concrete: Part I. Raw materials and mixture design. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 101, 741–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shafieifar, M.; Farzad, M.; Azizinamini, A. Experimental and numerical study on mechanical properties of Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC). Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 156, 402–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tayeh, B.A.; Bakar, B.H.A.; Johari, M.A.M. Characterization of the interfacial bond between old concrete substrate and ultra high performance fiber concrete repair composite. Mater. Struct. 2013, 46, 743–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, K.-Q.; Yu, J.-T.; Dai, J.-G.; Lu, Z.-D.; Shah, S.P. Development of ultra-high performance engineered cementitious composites using polyethylene (PE) fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 158, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richard, P.; Cheyrezy, M. Composition of reactive powder concretes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1995, 25, 1501–1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheyrezy, M.; Maret, V.; Frouin, L. Microstructural analysis of RPC (reactive powder concrete). Cem. Concr. Res. 1995, 25, 1491–1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yunsheng, Z.; Wei, S.; Sifeng, L.; Chujie, J.; Jianzhong, L. Preparation of C200 green reactive powder concrete and its static–dynamic behaviors. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008, 30, 831–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yiğiter, H.; Aydın, S.; Yazıcı, H.; Yardımcı, M.Y. Mechanical performance of low cement reactive powder concrete (LCRPC). Compos. Part B Eng. 2012, 43, 2907–2914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, W.; Luo, B.; Wang, Y. Compressive and tensile properties of reactive powder concrete with steel fibres at elevated temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 41, 844–851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, K.; Yu, R.; Shui, Z.; Li, X.; Ling, X.; He, W.; Yi, S.; Wu, S. Effects of pumice-based porous material on hydration characteristics and persistent shrinkage of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC). Materials 2019, 12, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Habel, K.; Viviani, M.; Denarié, E.; Brühwiler, E. Development of the mechanical properties of an ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC). Cem. Concr. Res. 2006, 36, 1362–1370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsalman, A.; Dang, C.N.; Hale, W.M. Development of ultra-high performance concrete with locally available materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 133, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graybeal, B. UHPC making strides. Public Roads 2009, 72, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
- Schmidt, M.; Fehling, E. Ultra-high-performance concrete: Research, development and application in Europe. ACI Spec. Publ. 2005, 228, 51–78. [Google Scholar]
- Graybeal, B.A. Compressive behavior of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete. ACI Mater. J. 2007, 104, 146. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.; Wu, C.; Liu, Z.-X. Comparative evaluation of steel wire mesh, steel fibre and high performance polyethylene fibre reinforced concrete slabs in blast tests. Thin-Walled Struct. 2018, 126, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, P.P.; Yu, Q.L.; Brouwers, H.J.H. Effect of PCE-type superplasticizer on early-age behaviour of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC). Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 153, 740–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sujatha, T.; Basanthi, D. Modified Reactive Powder Concrete. Int. J. Educ. Appl. Res. 2014, 4, 85–87. [Google Scholar]
- Li, P.P.; Yu, Q.L.; Brouwers, H.J.H. Effect of coarse basalt aggregates on the properties of Ultra-high Performance Concrete (UHPC). Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 170, 649–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, D.-Y.; Banthia, N. Mechanical properties of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete: A review. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2016, 73, 267–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, R.; Van Beers, L.; Spiesz, P.; Brouwers, H.J.H. Impact resistance of a sustainable Ultra-High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) under pendulum impact loadings. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 107, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, T.; Gao, X.; Ren, M. Effects of autoclave curing and fly ash on mechanical properties of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 158, 864–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazıcı, H.; Deniz, E.; Baradan, B. The effect of autoclave pressure, temperature and duration time on mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 42, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alkaysi, M.; El-Tawil, S.; Liu, Z.; Hansen, W. Effects of silica powder and cement type on durability of ultra high performance concrete (UHPC). Cem. Concr. Compos. 2016, 66, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garas, V.Y.; Kurtis, K.E.; Kahn, L.F. Creep of UHPC in tension and compression: Effect of thermal treatment. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 493–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tai, Y.-S.; El-Tawil, S. Effect of component materials and mixing protocol on the short-term performance of generic ultra-high-performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 238, 117703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wille, K.; Naaman, A.E.; El-Tawil, S.; Parra-Montesinos, G.J. Ultra-high performance concrete and fiber reinforced concrete: Achieving strength and ductility without heat curing. Mater. Struct. 2012, 45, 309–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wille, K.; Naaman, A.E.; Parra-Montesinos, G.J. Ultra-High Performance Concrete with Compressive Strength Exceeding 150 MPa (22 ksi): A Simpler Way. ACI Mater. J. 2011, 108, 46–54. [Google Scholar]
- Azmee, N.M.; Shafiq, N. Ultra-high performance concrete: From fundamental to applications. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2018, 9, e00197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voo, Y.L. Ultra High Performance Concrete”-Technology for Present and Future ACI Singapore. In Proceedings of the Building Construction Authority Joint Seminar on Concrete for Sustainability, Productivity and the Future, Singapore, 30 March 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Pyo, S.; Tafesse, M.; Kim, B.-J.; Kim, H.-K. Effects of quartz-based mine tailings on characteristics and leaching behavior of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 166, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Racky, P. Cost-effectiveness and sustainability of UHPC. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Ultra High Performance Concrete, Kassel, Germany, 13–15 September 2004; pp. 797–805. [Google Scholar]
- Graybeal, B. Ultra-High Performance Concrete; US Department of Transportation: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Allena, S.; Newtson, C.M. Ultra-high strength concrete mixtures using local materials. J. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2011, 5, 322–330. [Google Scholar]
- Tam, C.M.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Ng, K.M. Assessing drying shrinkage and water permeability of reactive powder concrete produced in Hong Kong. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 26, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shubbar, A.A.; Jafer, H.; Abdulredha, M.; Al-Khafaji, Z.S.; Nasr, M.S.; Al Masoodi, Z.; Sadique, M. Properties of cement mortar incorporated high volume fraction of GGBFS and CKD from 1 day to 550 days. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 30, 101327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reddy, V.S.G.; Rao, V.R. Eco-friendly blocks by blended materials. Int. J. Eng. 2017, 30, 636–642. [Google Scholar]
- Kanthe, V.; Deo, S.; Murmu, M. Combine use of fly ash and rice husk ash in concrete to improve its properties. Int. J. Eng. 2018, 31, 1012–1019. [Google Scholar]
- Nasr, M.S.; Shubbar, A.A.; Abed, Z.-A.R.; Ibrahim, M.S. Properties of eco-friendly cement mortar contained recycled materials from different sources. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 31, 101444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawileh, R.A.; Abdalla, J.A.; Fardmanesh, F.; Shahsana, P.; Khalili, A. Performance of reinforced concrete beams cast with different percentages of GGBS replacement to cement. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2017, 17, 511–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasr, M.S.; Hasan, Z.A.; Abed, M.K.; Dhahir, M.K.; Najim, W.N.; Shubbar, A.A.; Dhahir, H.Z. Utilization of High Volume Fraction of Binary Combinations of Supplementary Cementitious Materials in the Production of Reactive Powder Concrete. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng. 2021, 65, 335–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, S.; Hakeem, I.; Maslehuddin, M. Development of UHPC mixtures utilizing natural and industrial waste materials as partial replacements of silica fume and sand. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 713531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Soliman, N.A.; Tagnit-Hamou, A. Partial substitution of silica fume with fine glass powder in UHPC: Filling the micro gap. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 139, 374–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matte, V.; Moranville, M. Durability of reactive powder composites: Influence of silica fume on the leaching properties of very low water/binder pastes. Cem. Concr. Compos. 1999, 21, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gursel, A.P.; Maryman, H.; Ostertag, C. A life-cycle approach to environmental, mechanical, and durability properties of “green” concrete mixes with rice husk ash. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 823–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabehi, B.; Ghernouti, Y.; Boumchedda, K. Strength and compressive behaviour of ultra high-performance fibre-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) incorporating Algerian calcined clays as pozzolanic materials and silica fume. Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. 2013, 17, 599–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Zhang, J.; Liu, J.; Ke, J.; Wang, F. Properties and microstructure of reactive powder concrete having a high content of phosphorous slag powder and silica fume. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 101, 482–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazıcı, H.; Yiğiter, H.; Karabulut, A.Ş.; Baradan, B. Utilization of fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag as an alternative silica source in reactive powder concrete. Fuel 2008, 87, 2401–2407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Hu, S.; Ding, Q. Preparation of reactive powder concrete using fly ash and steel slag powder. J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. Sci. Ed. 2010, 25, 349–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, T.; Chen, B.; Shi, H. Research on the proportion of reactive powder concrete with blast-furnace slag. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2005, 23, 867. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, G.A.O.; Shuzhen, L.V.; Zhongyuan, L.U.; Jun, L.I.; Dan, Z. Preparation and properties of reactive powder concrete with circulating fluidized bed combustion fly ash. Chin. J. Mater. Res. 2014, 28, 59–66. [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, R.; Deng, Z.; Lan, M.; Shen, C. Experiment research on proportions of reactive powder concrete without silica fume. J. Jilin Univ. Eng. Technol. Ed. 2013, 3, 671–676. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, H.; Ji, T.; He, B.; He, L. Performance of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) with cement partially replaced by ground granite powder (GGP) under different curing conditions. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 213, 469–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, J.; Schneider, H. Properties of ultra-high-performance concrete. Leipzig Annu. Civ. Eng. Rep. 2002, 7, 25–32. [Google Scholar]
- Soutsos, M.N.; Millard, S.G.; Karaiskos, K. Mix design, mechanical properties, and impact resistance of reactive powder concrete (RPC). In Proceedings of the International Workshop on High Performance Fibre-Reinforced Cementitious Composites in Structural Applications, London, UK, 23 May 2005; pp. 549–560. [Google Scholar]
- Yazıcı, H. The effect of curing conditions on compressive strength of ultra high strength concrete with high volume mineral admixtures. Build. Environ. 2007, 42, 2083–2089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.; Rangaraju, P.R. Development of UHPC Using Ternary Blends of Ultra-Fine Class F Fly Ash, Meta-kaolin and Portland Cement. In Proceedings of the First International Interactive Symposium on Ultra-High Performance Concrete, Des Moines, IO, USA, 18–20 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Mosaberpanah, M.A. Utilizing Rice Husk Ash as Supplement to Cementitious Materials on Performance of Ultra High Performance Concrete—A review. Mater. Today Sustain. 2020, 7, 100030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Shi, C.; Wu, Z.; Xiao, J.; Huang, Z.; Fang, Z. A review on ultra high performance concrete: Part II. Hydration, microstructure and properties. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 96, 368–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tayeh, B.A.; Aadi, A.S.; Hilal, N.N.; Bakar, B.H.A.; Al-Tayeb, M.M.; Mansour, W.N. Properties of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC)—A review paper. In AIP Conference Proceedings; AIP Publishing LLC: Melville, NY, USA, 2019; Volume 2157, p. 20040. [Google Scholar]
- Mishra, O.; Singh, S.P. An overview of microstructural and material properties of ultra-high-performance concrete. J. Sustain. Cem. Mater. 2019, 8, 97–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khayat, K.H.; Meng, W.; Vallurupalli, K.; Teng, L. Rheological properties of ultra-high-performance concrete—An overview. Cem. Concr. Res. 2019, 124, 105828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaikh, F.U.A.; Luhar, S.; Arel, H.Ş.; Luhar, I. Performance evaluation of Ultrahigh performance fibre reinforced concrete—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 232, 117152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, S.; Hou, X.; Rong, Q. Dynamic compressive properties of reactive powder concrete at high temperature: A review. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2020, 110, 103568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aïtcin, P.-C. Supplementary cementitious materials and blended cements. In Science and Technology of Concrete Admixtures; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 53–73. [Google Scholar]
- Benson, C.H.; Bradshaw, S. User Guideline for Coal Fly Ash in Green Infrastructure Construction; University of Wisconsin-Madison: Madison, WI, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Das, S.K. Yudhbir Geotechnical characterization of some Indian fly ashes. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2005, 17, 544–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yardımcı, M.Y.; Aydın, S.; Karabulut, A.Ş. Mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete containing mineral admixtures under different curing regimes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 1223–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferdosian, I.; Camões, A.; Ribeiro, M. High-volume fly ash paste for developing ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC). Ciência Tecnol. Dos Mater. 2017, 29, e157–e161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Zhao, Y.; Li, H. Experimental investigation and prediction of compressive strength of ultra-high performance concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017, 2017, 4563164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bahedh, M.A.; Jaafar, M.S. Ultra high-performance concrete utilizing fly ash as cement replacement under autoclaving technique. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2018, 9, e00202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamal, I.K.; Elsayed, K.M.; Makhlouf, M.H.; Alaa, M. Properties of reactive powder concrete using local materials and various curing conditions. Eur. J. Eng. Res. Sci. 2019, 4, 74–83. [Google Scholar]
- Alsalman, A.; Dang, C.N.; Martí-Vargas, J.R.; Hale, W.M. Mixture-proportioning of economical UHPC mixtures. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 27, 100970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velázquez, S.; Monzó, J.; Borrachero, M.V.; Soriano, L.; Payá, J. Evaluation of the pozzolanic activity of spent FCC catalyst/fly ash mixtures in Portland cement pastes. Thermochim. Acta 2016, 632, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radlinski, M.; Olek, J. Investigation into the synergistic effects in ternary cementitious systems containing portland cement, fly ash and silica fume. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 451–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sumer, M. Compressive strength and sulfate resistance properties of concretes containing Class F and Class C fly ashes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 34, 531–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yildirim, H.; Sümer, M.; Akyüncü, V.; Gürbüz, E. Comparison on efficiency factors of F and C types of fly ashes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 2939–2947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oner, A.; Akyuz, S. An experimental study on optimum usage of GGBS for the compressive strength of concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2007, 29, 505–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, A.; Alengaram, U.J.; Jumaat, M.Z.; Bashar, I.I. The development of compressive strength of ground granulated blast furnace slag-palm oil fuel ash-fly ash based geopolymer mortar. Mater. Des. 2014, 56, 833–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazıcı, H.; Yardımcı, M.Y.; Yiğiter, H.; Aydın, S.; Türkel, S. Mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete containing high volumes of ground granulated blast furnace slag. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 639–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghafari, E.; Costa, H.; Júlio, E.; Portugal, A.; Durães, L. Enhanced durability of ultra high performance concrete by incorporating supplementary cementitious materials. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference Microdurability, Delft, The Netherland, 11–13 April 2012; pp. 86–94. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Yang, C.; Liu, F.; Wan, C.; Pu, X. Preparation of ultra-high performance concrete with common technology and materials. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 538–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, S. Development of ultra-high performance concrete incorporating blend of slag and silica fume as cement replacement’. Int. J. Civ. Struct. Eng. Res 2014, 2, 35–51. [Google Scholar]
- Randl, N.; Steiner, T.; Ofner, S.; Baumgartner, E.; Mészöly, T. Development of UHPC mixtures from an ecological point of view. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 67, 373–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Kim, H.; Koh, T.; Pyo, S. Enhancing flowability and sustainability of ultra high performance concrete incorporating high replacement levels of industrial slags. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 123, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, S. Effect of content and fineness of slag as high volume cement replacement on strength and durability of ultra-high performance mortar. J. Build. Mater. Struct. 2016, 3, 43–54. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, Z.; Shi, C.; He, W. Comparative study on flexural properties of ultra-high performance concrete with supplementary cementitious materials under different curing regimes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 136, 307–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ganesh, P.; Murthy, A.R. Tensile behaviour and durability aspects of sustainable ultra-high performance concrete incorporated with GGBS as cementitious material. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 197, 667–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadiger, A.; Madhavan, M.K. Influence of Mineral Admixtures and Fibers on Workability and Mechanical Properties of Reactive Powder Concrete. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2019, 31, 4018394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chidiac, S.E.; Panesar, D.K. Evolution of mechanical properties of concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag and effects on the scaling resistance test at 28 days. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008, 30, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, S.; Sohn, D.; Jennings, H.M.; Mason, T.O. Hydration of alkali-activated ground granulated blast furnace slag. J. Mater. Sci. 2000, 35, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beushausen, H.; Alexander, M.; Ballim, Y. Early-age properties, strength development and heat of hydration of concrete containing various South African slags at different replacement ratios. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 29, 533–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narmatha, M.; Felixkala, T. Experimental investigation of hpc using metakaolin and flyash with partial replacement of cement. In Proceedings of the INfrastructure Development for Environmental Conservation and Sustenance (INDECS-15), Hosur, India, 28–30 October 2015; p. 105. [Google Scholar]
- Justice, J.M. Evaluation of Metakaolins for Use as Supplementary Cementitious Materials. Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Rougeau, P.; Borys, B. Ultra high performance concrete with ultrafine particles other than silica fume. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Ultra High Performance Concrete, Kassel, Germany, 13–15 September 2004; Volume 32, pp. 213–225. [Google Scholar]
- Staquet, S.; Espion, B. Early age autogenous shrinkage of UHPC incorporating very fine fly ash or metakaolin in replacement of silica fume. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Ultra High Performance Concrete, Kessel, Germany, 13–15 September 2004; pp. 587–599. [Google Scholar]
- Tafraoui, A.; Escadeillas, G.; Lebaili, S.; Vidal, T. Metakaolin in the formulation of UHPC. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 669–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Azzawi, A.A.; Ali, A.S.; Risan, H.K. Behavior of ultra high performance concrete structures. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2011, 6, 95–109. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen Amanjean, E.; Vidal, T. Low Cost Ultra-High Performance Fiber Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) with Flash Metakaolin. In Proceedings of the Key Engineering Materials; Trans Tech Publishing: Bäch, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 629, pp. 55–63. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Z. Drying shrinkage prediction of paste containing meta-kaolin and ultrafine fly ash for developing ultra-high performance concrete. Mater. Today Commun. 2016, 6, 74–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tafraoui, A.; Escadeillas, G.; Vidal, T. Durability of the ultra high performances concrete containing metakaolin. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 112, 980–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, W.; Kazemi-Kamyab, H.; Sun, W.; Scrivener, K. Effect of replacement of silica fume with calcined clay on the hydration and microstructural development of eco-UHPFRC. Mater. Des. 2017, 121, 36–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šeps, K.; Broukalová, I.; Chylík, R. Cement Substitutions in UHPC and their Influence on Principal Mechanical-Physical Properties. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 522, p. 12009. [Google Scholar]
- Wille, K.; Boisvert-Cotulio, C. Material efficiency in the design of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 86, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singhania, N.P.; Marg, M.; Rice Husk Ash. The Institute of Concrete Technology Newsletter, The Engineering Council (UK). 2004. Available online: https://www.ricehuskash.com/publications/ (accessed on 5 December 2021).
- Van Tuan, N.; Ye, G.; van Breugel, K. Effect of rice husk ash on autogenous shrinkage of ultra high performance concrete. In Proceedings of the International RILEM Conference on Advances in Construction Materials through Science and Engineering, Hong Kong, China, 4–7 September 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Van Tuan, N.; Ye, G.; Van Breugel, K.; Copuroglu, O. Hydration and microstructure of ultra high performance concrete incorporating rice husk ash. Cem. Concr. Res. 2011, 41, 1104–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, E.B.; Zhuang, Y.Z.; Wang, F.C. Research on Ultra-High Performance Concrete with Rice Husk Ash. In Proceedings of the Applied Mechanics and Materials; Trans Tech Publishing: Bäch, Switzerland, 2013; Volume 330, pp. 131–135. [Google Scholar]
- Rößler, C.; Bui, D.-D.; Ludwig, H.-M. Rice husk ash as both pozzolanic admixture and internal curing agent in ultra-high performance concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2014, 53, 270–278. [Google Scholar]
- Asteray, B.; Oyawa, W.; Shitote, S. Experimental investigation on compressive strength of recycled reactive powder concrete containing glass powder and rice husk ash. J. Civ. Eng. Res. 2017, 7, 124–129. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, H.; Gao, X.; Wang, H.; Ye, H. Influence of rice husk ash on strength and permeability of ultra-high performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 149, 621–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amin, M. Properties of reactive powder concrete incorporating silica fume and rice husk ash. Chall. J. Concr. Res. Lett. 2018, 9, 114–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vigneshwari, M.; Arunachalam, K.; Angayarkanni, A. Replacement of silica fume with thermally treated rice husk ash in Reactive Powder Concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 188, 264–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, S.-H.; Hong, S.-G.; Moon, J. The use of rice husk ash as reactive filler in ultra-high performance concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2019, 115, 389–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rößler, C.; Bui, D.-D.; Ludwig, H.-M. Mesoporous structure and pozzolanic reactivity of rice husk ash in cementitious system. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 43, 208–216. [Google Scholar]
- Sharifi, N.P.; Jafferji, H.; Reynolds, S.E.; Blanchard, M.G.; Sakulich, A.R. Application of lightweight aggregate and rice husk ash to incorporate phase change materials into cementitious materials. J. Sustain. Cem. Mater. 2016, 5, 349–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Justs, J.; Wyrzykowski, M.; Bajare, D.; Lura, P. Internal curing by superabsorbent polymers in ultra-high performance concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2015, 76, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanytsky, M.; Kropyvnytska, T.; Fic, S.; Ivashchyshyn, H. Sustainable low-carbon binders and concretes. In E3S Web of Conferences; EDP Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2020; Volume 166, p. 6007. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, K.-H.; Jung, Y.-B.; Cho, M.-S.; Tae, S.-H. Effect of supplementary cementitious materials on reduction of CO2 emissions from concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 103, 774–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, M.; Zhang, Y.; Ji, Y.; Liu, G.; Liu, C.; She, W.; Sun, W. Reducing environmental impacts and carbon emissions: Study of effects of superfine cement particles on blended cement containing high volume mineral admixtures. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 196, 358–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Black, L. Low clinker cement as a sustainable construction material. In Sustainability of Construction Materials; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 415–457. [Google Scholar]
- Heath, A.; Paine, K.; McManus, M. Minimising the global warming potential of clay based geopolymers. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 78, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Shi, Y.; Long, G.; Ma, C.; Xie, Y.; He, J. Design and preparation of ultra-high performance concrete with low environmental impact. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 214, 633–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henry, C.S.; Lynam, J.G. Embodied energy of rice husk ash for sustainable cement production. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2020, 2, 100004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Reference | SF (%) | FA (%) | Other Materials | Curing Methods | Tests Conducted | Maximum Achieved Compressive Strength |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[50] | 35 | 10, 20, 40 and 60 | GGBFS (10%) | Autoclave curing | Compressive strength and SEM | 248 MPa for mixtures with 20% FA and 262 MPa for mixtures with 10% FA and 10% GGBFS |
[70] | 15–26 | 10, 20 and 30 | GGBFS (10%) | Standard, autoclave and steam curing | The strengths of compressive and flexural, toughness and SEM | 268 MPa for mixtures with 20% FA and 270 MPa for mixtures with 10% FA and 10% GGBFS under autoclave curing. |
[10] | 30 | 20, 40, 60 | - | Standard, autoclave and steam curing | Compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, flexural strength, fracture energy and SEM | 270 MPa for mixtures with 20% FA under autoclave curing. |
[44] | 4, 8, 12 and 20 | 4, 8 and 12 | - | Standard water curing | Flow and compressive strength | 157 MPa for mixtures with 60% FA |
[71] | 0 and 5 | 10–35 | MK (0% and 2.5%) | Standard water curing | Flow and compressive strength | 153 MPa for mixtures with 20% FA |
[72] | 5, 10, 15 and 20 | 30 | - | Standard water curing | Compressive strength, pore-volume and SEM | 140 MPa for mixtures with 30% FA and 20% SF after 365 days. |
[73] | - | 10, 20, 30 and 40 | - | Standard water and autoclave curing | Flow, compressive strength and water penetration | 122 MPa for mixtures with 40% FA |
[24] | 12.5 | 10, 20 and 30 | - | Standard water and autoclave curing | The strengths of compressive and flexural, mercury intrusion measurement (MIP), fracture toughness X-ray diffraction (XRD) and SEM. | 168 MPa for mixtures with 30% FA after 10 h of autoclave curing. |
[74] | 10 | 15, 20 and 25 | - | Standard water and hot water curing | Density, the strengths of splitting tensile, flexure strength and compressive strength; and Slump flow | 93.33 MPa for mixtures with 20% FA |
[75] | 5.5 and 20 | 20, 30, 40 and 50 | - | Heat-curing | Compressive strength | 148 MPa for mixture with 40% FA and 5.5% SF after 28 days of heat curing at 90 °C. |
Reference | SF (%) | GGBS (%) | Other Materials | Curing Methods | Tests Conducted | Maximum Achieved Compressive Strength |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[82] | - | 20, 40 and 60 | - | Standard, autoclave and steam curing | Flexural strength, compressive strength, toughness, fracture energy and SEM | 378 MPa for mixtures with 40% GGBS after the application of 30 MPa pressure for 8 h |
[83] | 0 and 11.5 | 10 and 23 | - | Standard and steam curing | Compressive strength, flexural strength, autogenous shrinkage, Water absorption and volume of permeable voids | 162 MPa for mixtures with 23% GGBS and 11.5% SF under steam curing 90 °C. |
[84] | 10 | 20 and 40 | Limestone powder (0%, 20% and 40%) | Standard water curing | Fluidity, compressive strength and SEM | 178 MPa for mixtures with 20% GGBS and 10% SF and 182.9 MPa for mixtures with 20% GGBS, 10% SF and 20% limestone powder after 365 days of curing |
[85] | 0, 10, 15 and 20 | 40, 60 and 80 | - | Sealed curing, air curing and moist curing | Compressive strength and flexural strength | 165 MPa for mixtures with 60% GGBS and 181 MPa for mixtures with 60% GGBS and 10% SF after 90 days of curing |
[86] | 17 | 45 | - | Standard water curing | Flow and compressive strength | 163.5 MPa for mixtures with 45% extra fine GGBS |
[87] | 25 | 15, 30 and 50 | - | Standard water curing | Flow and compressive strength | 160 MPa for mixtures with 15% GGBS after 28 days of curing |
[88] | - | 20 and 60 | - | Standard water curing | Flow, compressive strength, flexural strength, water penetration and chloride migration | 146 MPa for mixtures with 20% GGBS after 90 days of curing |
[89] | 25 | 20, 40 and 60 | - | Standard water, hot water and steam curing | Flow, compressive strength, flexural strength and toughness | 182 MPa for mixtures with 20% GGBS using hot water curing and steam curing. |
[90] | 15 | 20, 40, 60 and 80 | - | Standard water and oven curing | Flow, compressive strength, tensile strength, fracture, rapid chloride penetration, water sorptivity and SEM. | 167.95 MPa for mixtures with 40% GGBS under oven curing at 150 °C. |
[91] | - | 5, 10 and 15 | - | Standard water curing, preheat curing and post-heat curing | Workability, compressive strength, split tensile strength, flexure strength and XRD | 165 MPa for mixture with 10% GGBS after post-heat curing |
Reference | SF (%) | MK (%) | Other Materials | Curing Methods | Tests Conducted | Maximum Achieved Compressive Strengths |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[97] | - | 16.7 | - | Fog room | Flow flexural strengths, compressive strengths, Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry (MIP), water absorptions and accelerated carbonation | 170 MPa after 90 days of curing |
[98] | 9 | 15 | - | Curing at 20 °C and a heat curing at 42 °C | Compressive strengths and shrinkage | 148 MPa after 2 days of heat curing at 42 °C. |
[99] | - | 20 | - | Standard water curing, thermal water curing | Flexural strengths and compressive strengths | 243 MPa for mixtures subjected to thermal water curing at 150 °C |
[100] | 10 | 15 | - | Standard water curing | Compressive strengths | 198 MPa for mixture with 10% SF after 28 days of curing |
[48] | - | 25 | - | Standard water curing | Flow, compressive strengths and flexural strengths | 163.5 MPa for mixtures with 45% extra fine GGBS |
[101] | 20 | 20 and 24 | - | Standard water curing | Flow, slump, compressive strengths and flexural strengths | 172 MPa for mixture with 20% SF after 28 days of curing |
[102] | - | 5, 10 and 20 | FA (0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30%) | Moist room | Flow and drying shrinkage | - |
[103] | - | 25 | - | Standard water curing | Compressive strengths, flexural strengths, porosity, Permeability to oxygen, diffusion and migration of the chloride ions; absorption of water by capillarity; accelerated carbonation; leaching, XRD and SEM | 146 MPa after 28 days of curing. |
[104] | - | 9 | Limestone (54%) | Sealed curing at 20 °C | Compressive, differential thermogravimetry (TGA), MIP and SEM. | 142 MPa after 56 days of curing |
[105] | - | 10, 20 and 30 | - | Air curing | Density, compressive strengths and flexural strengths | 110 MPa for mixture with 20% MK after 28 days of curing |
Reference | SF (%) | RHA (%) | Other Materials | Curing Methods | Tests Conducted | Maximum Achieved Compressive Strengths |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[108] | - | 10 and 20 | - | Fog room | Compressive strengths, autogenous shrinkage, SEM, MIP and TGA | 185 MPa for mixtures with 20% RHA after 91 days of curing |
[109] | - | 20 | - | Fog room | Compressive strengths, SEM, MIP and TGA | 185 MPa for mixtures with 20% RHA after 91 days of curing |
[2] | 0, 5, 10 and 15 | 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 | - | Fog room | Flow, compressive strengths, autogenous shrinkage, Portrandite content, SEM and XRD. | 210 MPa for mixtures with 10% RHA and 10% SF after 91 days of curing |
[110] | 10, 20 and 30 | 10, 20 and 30 | - | Standard water curing | Pozzolanic activity, adsorption capacity and compressive strengths | 180 MPa for mixtures with 10% RHA and 10% SF after 28 days of curing |
[111] | - | 17 | GGBS (0% and 20%) | Air curing and heat curing | Flow and compressive strengths | 212 MPa for mixtures with 17% RHA and 20% GGBS after 360 days of curing at both air curing and heat curing at 60 °C |
[112] | - | 4, 10 and 15 | WGP (5%, 10% and 16%) | Standard water curing | Compressive strengths | 57 MPa for mixtures with 4% RHA and 16% WGP after 28 days of curing |
[113] | 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19 | 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 and 23 | - | Fog room | Flow, flexural strengths, compressive strengths, permeability and MIP | 137.2 MPa for mixtures with 16% RHA and 8% SF after 120 days of curing. |
[114] | 0, 10 and 15 | 10, 15, 20 and 25 | GGBS (0, 10% and 15%) | Standard water curing | Water Permeability, elasticity modulus, the strengths of (bond, flexural, splitting tensile and compressive), air content and Slump | 202.3 MPa for mixtures with 20% RHA after 91 days of curing. |
[115] | 12, 14.4, 16.8, 19.2 and 21.6 | 2.4, 4.8, 7.2, 9.2 and 12 | - | Standard water and steam curing | Compressive strengths, flexure strengths, splitting tensile strengths, porosity, rapid chloride penetration and XRD | 230 MPa for mixtures with 7.2% RHA and 16.8% SF after 28 days of steam curing. |
[116] | 0, 9, 10 and 17 | 9, 10 and 17 | - | Air curing | Compressive strengths, TGA, XRD, SEM and MIP. | 190 MPa for mixture with 17% RHA and 17% SF after 91 days of curing |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hamad, M.A.; Nasr, M.; Shubbar, A.; Al-Khafaji, Z.; Al Masoodi, Z.; Al-Hashimi, O.; Kot, P.; Alkhaddar, R.; Hashim, K. Production of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete with Low Energy Consumption and Carbon Footprint Using Supplementary Cementitious Materials Instead of Silica Fume: A Review. Energies 2021, 14, 8291. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14248291
Hamad MA, Nasr M, Shubbar A, Al-Khafaji Z, Al Masoodi Z, Al-Hashimi O, Kot P, Alkhaddar R, Hashim K. Production of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete with Low Energy Consumption and Carbon Footprint Using Supplementary Cementitious Materials Instead of Silica Fume: A Review. Energies. 2021; 14(24):8291. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14248291
Chicago/Turabian StyleHamad, Mays A., Mohammed Nasr, Ali Shubbar, Zainab Al-Khafaji, Zainab Al Masoodi, Osamah Al-Hashimi, Patryk Kot, Rafid Alkhaddar, and Khalid Hashim. 2021. "Production of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete with Low Energy Consumption and Carbon Footprint Using Supplementary Cementitious Materials Instead of Silica Fume: A Review" Energies 14, no. 24: 8291. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14248291