Next Article in Journal
Urban Parks as Green Buffers During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring the Interactions of Factory Workers in China: A Model Development Using the Grounded Theory Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Analysis of the State-Dependent Queueing Model and Its Application to Battery Swapping and Charging Stations
Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of Alternative Home-Produced Concrete Strength with Economic Analysis

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New Haven, West Haven, CT 06516, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(17), 6746; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176746
Received: 8 June 2020 / Revised: 14 August 2020 / Accepted: 18 August 2020 / Published: 20 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Economic Feasibility for Sustainability)
Ready-mix concrete is not always affordable because it is less economical for small projects. This study shows an effort to introduce alternative home-produced concrete for small paving areas such as sidewalks, backyards, or fixing the existing concrete and discusses the economic evaluation of the alternative concrete for home purpose. The materials being used in this study are available locally or are easily purchased. The primary objective of the study is to analyze the compressive strength and conduct economic analysis of alternative home-produced concrete with different mix designs. Wood ash, fly ash, and recycled aggregate concretes are the alternative concrete types discussed in this study. Fly ash can replace Portland cement up to 30% without losing significant compressive strength of the concrete. Furthermore, fly ash is less expensive than Portland cement and can reduce the cost of concrete by saving approximately 15%. Wood ash can be used up to 25% in concrete without losing considerable strength which saves approximately 13% of cement cost. The use of recycled concrete aggregates saves only about 1% CO2 emission compared to regular concrete while fly ash saves more than 28.5% and wood ash saves almost 24.5%. They can replace natural aggregates up to 100%, but there is only a 5% saving. In addition, an equivalent cost of USD 13.47 for one cubic yard of concrete could be saved by using 30% fly ash concrete when considering reduced emitted CO2eq from the material production. View Full-Text
Keywords: fly ash concrete; wood ash concrete; recycled aggregate concrete; compressive strength; cement replacement; sustainability; economic analysis; CO2 emission factors fly ash concrete; wood ash concrete; recycled aggregate concrete; compressive strength; cement replacement; sustainability; economic analysis; CO2 emission factors
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Shaker, M.R.; Bhalala, M.; Kargar, Q.; Chang, B. Evaluation of Alternative Home-Produced Concrete Strength with Economic Analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6746. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176746

AMA Style

Shaker MR, Bhalala M, Kargar Q, Chang B. Evaluation of Alternative Home-Produced Concrete Strength with Economic Analysis. Sustainability. 2020; 12(17):6746. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176746

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shaker, Muhammad R.; Bhalala, Mayurkumar; Kargar, Qayoum; Chang, Byungik. 2020. "Evaluation of Alternative Home-Produced Concrete Strength with Economic Analysis" Sustainability 12, no. 17: 6746. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176746

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop