TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION IN THE NEW MILLENIUM

Alex Aswad, Ph.D., P.E. Engineering Science Graduate Program Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg
777 West Harrisburg Pike, W-255 Middletown, PA 17057-4898 axa11@psu.edu

Daniel D. McClure, B.S., P.E. Transmission Line Engineer Northeast Utilities

107 Selden Street Berlin, CT 06037 mccludd@nu.com

Abstract: Reinforced concrete construction is vital to our modern society and is very common
in the United States and throughout the world. The main ingredients of concrete are gravel, sand, water, and cement. Aggregates and cement ingredients are obtained from riverbed material and quarries, respectively. Though abundant and readily available, they should be considered nonrenewable resources. Recently, there has been a major concern about the environmental side effects from the manufacturing of portland cement. Its manufacture accounts for about 7% of the worldwide carbon dioxide (CO2). The reason for concern is because CO2 is a major gas promoting the greenhouse effect. Reliable studies by cement scientists show that for every ton of cement produced, one ton of CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Concrete usage is unavoidable. Keeping this in mind, attention must be focused on mitigating the environmental impact of its production and usage. This paper focuses on recommendations for utilizing alternative construction methods (i.e. precast concrete) and substitute materials (i.e. slag and fly ash wastes) to reduce the usage of both aggregate and cement while having a sustainable development. From the use of these substitute materials, a more durable concrete would result and would also help to alleviate the greenhouse effect. Finally, suggestions are offered for enhancing sustainable construction trends through education and college curricula.

Keywords: Carbon dioxide; cement; concrete construction; fly ash; precast construction; slag.

Introduction
Background on Concrete There are three main ingredients in concrete mixes: aggregates, hydraulic cement, and water. The necessity of these three ingredients is due to the chemistry behind a concrete mix. It is necessary to have a bond between the aggregates and cement, and the reaction between cement and water produces a paste that permits this bond to occur. The key material discussed in this report is hydraulic cement. The most common type of hydraulic cement used in concrete mixtures is portland cement, which is manufactured from abundant and naturally occurring materials such as limestone and cement rock. A large amount of energy is required to manufacture portland cement, and the cost of the material reflects this. At around 70 US dollars per ton, portland cement is the costliest material of the three fundamental ingredients. Environmental Impact of Concrete Compared to other construction materials, concrete has many environmental benefits such as energy efficiency, low maintenance and potential re-use by crushing at the end of service life. But the use of concrete has a negative environmental impact as well because it requires the manufacture of portland cement. The manufacture of portland cement releases a large amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. The actual amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere from cement manufacture has been estimated at seven (7) percent worldwide, which is a large number for one industry. To relate cement production with greenhouse gas release, for every tonne of cement produced, about one tonne of CO2 is released into the atmosphere (Malhotra 1999). Concrete Strength Development Concrete can be manufactured to various specifications. The most important specification is the concretes compressive strength (fc) at an age of 28 days. The compressive strength refers to the concretes ability to withstand compressive forces. Its specified strength dictates to what loads the concrete may carry. When the concrete crushes, the member is said to have failed. Concretes tensile strength is not mentioned because concrete is extremely weak in tension, therefore it is generally useless as an unreinforced flexural member. Most cast-in-place concrete specifications call for a 28-day compressive strength. When concrete is being placed, small representative concrete cylinders of the concrete mix are taken and cured for four weeks before testing. In precast construction, the 1-day strength is another major parameter.

High Strength and High Performance Concretes Concrete mixes that have a compressive strength (fc) greater than 6000 psi (40 MPa) are usually referred to as high-strength concrete mixes (Russell 1997). High-performance concrete (HPC) is different than high-strength concrete. To be called high-strength, a concrete mixture must only have a high compressive strength. For a mixture to be classified as a HPC concrete, generally three criteria need to be satisfied: a. Increased compressive strength fc b. Increased durability c. Increased workability

Efficient Solutions in the Public and Private Sectors

In the following sections, efficient solutions for decreasing the amount of cement usage in both the public and private sectors will be discussed. Transportation Structures Efficient Sections In the last two decades there has been significant research into more efficient sections for one of the main structural members in prestressed bridges, the I-girder. The governing body for the design of I-Beam sections is the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO has standard sections, though some states use modified (slimmer) sections. There is a need to update obsolete standard sections with newer modified sections for many reasons. One of the reasons include savings on concrete, which in turn, reduces portland cement usage. It is also believed that if the modified sections contain less concrete, precast beam suppliers may be able to compete easier against steel alternatives in bridge construction and provide cost savings to the state and counties. The two sections compared here are an AASHTO Type VI Girder (Fig.1-a) and a Modified Type VI Girder (Fig. 1-b). These sections are for use in a typical I-girder bridge superstructure (Fig. 2). A quantity and cost analysis was performed and, as expected, savings were found when the modified section was substituted for the standard AASHTO section. The savings on concrete volume average 13%. This is important due to both the cost of concrete and through the reduction in portland cement usage. Transportation Structures High Performance Concrete The use of modified cross sections can be used to decrease the amount of portland cement required in bridge construction. Another way to decrease the cement consumption is through the use of high performance concrete (HPC) with compressive strengths 7500 psi. Regardless of the increased cost (per cu.yd) to manufacture HPC, the savings are found in the actual construction of the structure. The cost decrease is found mainly due to the ability to 2

eliminate several beam lines because of the increased strength of the concrete. Bridge superstructure costs are substantially lower when the numbers of girders are reduced as a result of specifying a HPC concrete. In a recent study (1997) Hassanain and Loov found that decreasing the number of girders from five to three for high transportation and erection costs results in an overall saving of 27%. A similar reduction in girders for low transportation and erection costs results in a savings of 20%. The second economic advantage is the ability to use shallower sections (Russell 1994). Quoting Russell, Making possible shallower spans may be the single largest impact that high strength concrete will have on pretensioned concrete girder bridges. The advantages of this are two-fold. First, since the section is reduced, there will be a savings in the concrete and materials required. Secondly, since the elevation of the structure is decreased, additional saving can be expected in other aspects of the construction process such as earth fill in the approaches, grading, etc. Russell (1994) also found that significant savings could be expected on bridge piers and abutments. In addition, he found that shallower spans permit easier rehabilitation of bridges because in-place construction during a retrofitting operation is much less difficult, and therefore less costly. However, there are some limitations with the use of HPC, mostly resting on plant quality control and also strength limitations. The first is plant quality control. This was found by Russell (1997) during his research and he stated that a concrete plant will have to be held to a higher standard when manufacturing HPC than with regular concrete. The other limitation is the strength of a HPC member. Russell concludes that HPC strengths are limited in prestressed bridge members to around 10,000 psi (69 MPa) until the following can be addressed through updating current methods and specifications: a) Closer prestressing strand spacing and larger size strands b) Higher grade strands c) Post tensioning d) Less assumed prestress loss e) Girder with a wide bottom flange. If these points are addressed, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is currently investigating some of them through field applications, then HPC can be used effectively and advantageously in the construction of bridge structures. HPC is the way to go since it allows the usage of fewer girders and shallower cross sections that introduce savings in construction costs and a decrease in portland cement usage. Housing Structures and Condominiums It is also possible to introduce solutions to decrease cement consumption in the

private sector. This section will focus on the private sector through examining multi-family dwellings such as condominiums. There is a tremendous opportunity to decrease cement consumption by substituting the cast-in-place (CIP) construction with precast construction. In a pilot study we performed on a 3-story building, Fig. 3, we found that switching from CIP to precast construction results in 35% savings () on the volume of concrete. This translates into about a third reduction in concrete and cement consumption, which is very significant, both environmentally and economically. As Malhotra (1999) indicated earlier, for every tonne of cement produced a tonne of CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Following this it can be deduced that, by substituting precast construction for C.I.P. construction in the condominium layout indicated in Fig. 3, the 35% saving of concrete volume will transfer to greatly reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Cement Substitutes and Their Features

This chapter focuses on materials that can be used in concrete mixes to substitute a portion of cement. These substitute products enhance certain qualities of concrete, most notably durability. The two major cement substitutes discussed will be the industrial by-products fly ash and ground, granulated blast-furnace slag. Fly Ash Fly ash, also referred to as coal ash, is an industrial by-product of coal-burning power plants. It is common to almost all industrial countries. As indicated in the report by McClure et al. (2000), currently the worldwide fly ash production is approximately 400 million tons. Fly ash is currently being utilized as a substitute material for cement in concrete construction. However, it is being under-utilized. Mehta (1999), a notable concrete researcher, has found that the utilization of fly ash in concrete mixtures is currently limited to an average of six (6) percent. The reason for this is that most current construction codes, specifications, and building practices usually limit the usage to less than a 15% of the cement mixture. The concrete mixture, however, can use a much higher ratio than 15%, and current fly ash cements should reflect this. The argument against the utilization of more than a 15% ratio of fly ash is due to concerns about the concrete having lower initial strengths than if it were made with a regular portland cement mix (Rosenbaum 1998). This argument is refuted by Rosenbaums interview with F. Macgregor Miller, senior principal process scientist at the well-known Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (CTL): The net benefits outweigh the potential disadvantages. Rosenbaum then paraphrases Miller by saying He recommends using up to 40% of the more limey fly ash, although concrete made with fly ash might lag in strength gain the first week. After 28 days, it typically surpasses conventional concrete. This is further proven by Malhotras (1999) research.

In addition to having increased compressive strength, fly ash concretes also experience enhanced durability characteristics. This will be discussed further in a following section. To conclude this section, a quote from Ed Abdun-Nur, a noted U.S. concrete technologist, found in Malhotras (1999) article illustrates the necessity for the use of fly ash: In the real world of modern concrete, fly ash is as essential an ingredient of the mixture as are portland cements, aggregates, water, and chemical admixtures. In most concretes, I use it in larger amounts (by volume) than portland cementConcrete without fly ash and chemical admixtures should only be found in museum show cases. Blast Furnace Slag Blast furnace slag shares many similarities to fly ash. Like fly ash, blast furnace slag is an industrial by-product. It is generated during steel manufacturing. Stated in the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) definition, ground granulated blast-furnace slag is highly cementious in nature and, ground to cement fineness, hydrates like portland cement. Because of these characteristics, ground granulated blast-furnace slag can and should be used as an ideal cement substitute. Concrete mixes using ground granulated blast-furnace slag are commonly referred to as slag cements. Slag cements are utilized more than fly ash cements, especially in the central and eastern United States and also in Texas. Typically, slag cement replaces around 50% of the portland cement in concrete mixes. However, ratios as high as 70% have been used. The major reason for this usage is that ground granulated blast-furnace slag is a very consistent product because steel producers stringently monitor their raw materials to ensure quality. Like fly ash, the ratios are usually limited below their full potential. For example, in certain applications, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) only allows up to a 35% cement replacement (Dodson, 1999). Similar to fly ash concrete, slag cement concrete also experiences a higher compressive strength than regular portland cement concrete. Slag cement mixtures also offer beneficial characteristics, notably durability. These features will be discussed in the following section. Features and Qualities of Concrete With Substitute Materials In addition to simply replacing cement in concrete materials, substitute materials such as fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag can also be used as a solution to a growing, national concern durability. Concrete structures, mainly bridge decks and parking garage floors, are coming under intense scrutiny because of their early cracking and degradation. In Mehtas (1997) report, the 1987 National Material Advisory Board reported 253,000 bridge decks deteriorating, with 35,000 decks added to the list every year. It is notable that these decks have not outlived their service life. In fact, some of the decks are less than 20 years old. Besides having durability issues at

stake, there are environmental concerns as well. Each rehabilitation involves the use of concrete, so the environmental issues studied in the previous sections apply. The solution to the durability problem is two-pronged. First, we must address what is wrong with the current state of durability research, and secondly we must find a solution within the materials that are used in construction. The current problem with durability research is the beliefs in how durability can be achieved. The current popular theory is that there is a relationship between durability and the compressive strength of concrete (Mehta, 1997). Mehta states that this relationship needs critical examination. A property of concrete is introduced: soundness. Defined by Mehta, soundness is based on the concretes freedom from cracking. This is where attention must be focused. There are many variables that cause concrete to crack. However, permeability is the most critical of them all. When water is allowed into the concrete, cracking will almost always occur. The presence of salt and/or aggressive environment further amplifies this problem. If the major cause of cracking is due to concretes permeability, then we must attempt to prevent this from happening and make an impermeable concrete. Substitute materials including fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag greatly aid in the development of an impermeable concrete. Fly ash, by its chemical composition offers excellent resistance to permeation (Mehta 1999). The other durability issues that can be resolved by using fly ash are outlined in Rosenbaums (1998) article: a) Improved resistance to sulfates and water b) Better protection for reinforcing bars c) Lower water-to-cement ratio The addition of ground granulated blast-furnace slag produces similar results. Slag cement aids in the concretes impermeability and also resolves the three durability issues mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Mehta (1999) ranked the current advancements in technology which included fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag with five variables considered, namely: a) Complexity of the technology b) Initial cost of material and construction c) Life-cycle cost d) Environmental friendliness e) Future impact on industry With respect to environmental friendliness, fly ash cement and slag cement received ratings of excellent. Also important, both substitute materials received ratings of low with respect to the complexity of the technology, initial costs, and life-cycle costs. As a result of this, the predicted future impact on the industry is listed as high.

In summary, if the suggestions stated in this report were fully adopted, it is estimated that at least one and one-half (1 ) percent of the overall greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced. This would decrease the cement industrys greenhouse gas emissions from seven (7) percent of the entire worlds emissions down to five and a half (5 ) percent.

Conclusions and Recommendations Conclusions a) Although concrete is an efficient construction material and presents many benefits compared to other alternatives, its cement ingredient contributes about one ton of CO2 for each ton of cement produced. This is a large contributor to the greenhouse effect (about seven percent of the total greenhouse gases). Because of this, it is desirable to reduce the usage of cement worldwide. b) There are available methods for reducing the cement and concrete usage, namely by the use of high-strength concrete and efficient sections in transportation structures and by using precast concrete construction instead of cast-in-place concrete in the private sector (residential and office structures). The use of efficient sections saves between 13% and 27% of concrete and the use of precast concrete construction may save more than a third of the concrete volume. Overall, if the suggestions outlined in this report are adopted, the impact on concrete usage will be significant. c) Furthermore, the use of substitute materials such as fly ash and ground granulated blastfurnace slag in concrete mixtures will also decrease the amount of cement usage. Since fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag are waste products from power plants and steel production, respectively, it is desirable to recycle this waste. Although practice and construction specifications already allow the usage of these products, their permissible limits are too low. Recent research indicates these materials can be used at much higher ratios than those in current practice. Finally, these materials greatly aid in enhancing the concrete structures durability and performance. Recommendations a) The public sector is encouraged to utilize more efficient sections in transportation structures, namely bridges, and to use more substitute materials in paving and sidewalks. It is an excellent time to start doing this because of the current shortage of cement. b) More funding toward research and development of the long-term behavior of concrete with a higher ratio of substitute materials should be given high priority. c) Professional societies should develop a wide-ranging educational program to alert professional engineers and engineering students to the environmental impact of concrete usage, and to the benefits of using efficient solutions and substitute materials.

Figures

Figure 1-a: AASHTO Type VI Girder

Figure 1-b: Modified Type VI Girder

Figure 2: Typical Cross Section of an I-Girder Bridge

Figure 3: Precast Condominium Building Plan

Acknowledgments
The pilot investigation and literature review described in this paper were carried out under sponsorship from the Berg Fellowship Fund at Penn State Harrisburg. The authors would like to thank Professor Charles Cole for his encouragement and review comments, and Brian Cramer for his contribution to selected portions of the original report.

References
Hassanain, A., & Loov, R. (1997). Design Optimization of Precast Girder Bridges Made With High-Performance Concrete. PCI/FHWA International Symposium on High Performance Concrete, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 1-12. Malhotra, V. (1999, May). Making Concrete Greener With Fly Ash. Concrete International, 61-66. McClure, D. and Cramer, B. (2000). Towards a Sustainable Development in Concrete Construction in the New Millennium, a Report submitted to the School of Science, Engineering and Technology, Penn State Harrisburg, Middletown, PA. Mehta, P. (1999, June). Advancements in Concrete Technology. Concrete International, 69-76. Mehta, P. (1997, July). Durability Critical Issues for the Future. Concrete International, 27-33. Neville, A. (2000, January). There is More to Concrete Than Cement. Concrete International, 73-74. Rosenbaum, D. (1998, December 21). In Cement, Fly Ash Emerges as a Cure to Limit Greenhouse Gases. Engineering News Record, 13. Russell, B. (1994). Impact of High Strength Concrete on the Design and Construction Of Pretensioned Girder Bridges. PCI Journal, 39, 76-89. Russell, H. (1997). High-Strength Concrete in Bridges History and Challenges. PCI/FHWA International Symposium on High Performance Concrete, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 27-38.