sustainability

Article
Influence of Rice Straw Fibers on Concrete Strength
and Drying Shrinkage
Feraidon Ataie
Concrete Industry Management Program, California State University-Chico, Chico, CA 95929, USA;
fataie@csuchico.edu; Tel: +1-530-898-5489




Received: 1 June 2018; Accepted: 10 July 2018; Published: 13 July 2018


Abstract: Fibers have been used in construction materials for centuries. This study investigated
the impact of the addition of rice straw fibers (RSF) on the compressive and flexural strengths of
concrete, drying shrinkage, and on the heat of cement hydration. RSF was saturated before being
added to concrete. Addition of RSF in concrete reduced concrete strength, increased concrete drying
shrinkage, and increased the induction period of cement hydration. It was suggested that water
squeezed out of RSF during mixing and sample consolidation increased effective water-to-cement
ratios (w/c) and resulted in reduction of concrete strength and increase of concrete drying shrinkage.
The increase of retardation time was attributed to leaching of organic and inorganic compounds
out of RSF into the pore solution. It was shown that samples containing washed RSF did not have
noticeable improvement in compressive strength over samples containing unwashed (as received)
RSF. However, samples containing washed RSF had lower drying shrinkage and shorter induction
period compared to those containing unwashed RSF.

Keywords: natural fibers; rice straw fibers; drying shrinkage; concrete strength; heat of hydration

1. Introduction
Utilization of fibers in construction materials has a long history. The oldest form of fibers used
in construction materials, such as bricks and masonry mortar, were straw and horsehair [1]. Today,
several types of fibers are manufactured and are used in various engineering materials including
concrete and ceramics. Fibers are used in concrete to enhance various concrete properties such as
tensile strength, impact resistance, and shrinkage [1,2].
Natural fibers (or vegetable fibers), such as wood pulp and straw, are organic-based materials;
cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin are their main composition. Natural fibers can be divided into
two groups, unprocessed and processed natural fibers [1]. The difference between processed and
unprocessed natural fibers is that the processed natural fibers undergo chemical, mechanical, thermal,
or a combination of these three treatment techniques to change the chemical and/or physical properties
of natural fibers.
Natural fibers could provide a renewable and widely available source of fibers for concrete at low
cost [3,4]. Natural fibers have been used in manufacturing non-pressure pipes and roof sheeting [1,5].
In a study, Mezencevova et al. [6] showed that adding thermomechanical pulp fibers in cementitious
systems reduced heat of hydration rate and delayed set time, but decreased autogenous shrinkage
of paste samples. Another study found that adding 40 mm long hemp and elephant grass fibers to
concrete increases the fracture toughness of concrete [3]. It has also been shown that sisal fibers reduce
plastic shrinkage and restrained shrinkage cracking of concrete; however, sisal fibers increase drying
shrinkage of concrete [7]. In their study, Khorami and Ganjian [8] showed that addition of bagasse and
wheat fibers (length of fibers were approximately 1.2 mm) in concrete increases flexural strength and
ductility of concrete samples.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445; doi:10.3390/su10072445 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 2 of 13

Using natural fibers in concrete presents some challenges though. Natural fibers degrade in
concrete overtime [9,10]. It has been shown that pulp fibers degrade in concrete under wetting and
drying conditions [10]. This has been attributed to loss of bond between fibers and the cement matrix
and the embrittlement of fibers due to mineralization of hydration produces, mainly calcium hydroxide,
in lumens of fibers [10,11]. However, it has been shown that using supplementary cementitious
materials (SCMs), such as metakaolin and slag, in concrete mix could prevent natural fiber degradation
in concrete [9].
Rice straw, which is a by-product of rice production, is another natural and sustainable resource
that could be used to produce fibers for concrete. Rice straw is available worldwide in large amounts.
Commonly, rice straw is used either as a livestock feed, burned at the field, or incorporated into the
soil. Each of these rice straw utilization methods presents challenges [12]. Although burning rice
straw on site is the cheapest method of rice straw disposal, this method raises environmental concerns
as burning rice straw releases carbon dioxide. This is why some states, like California, banned the
burning of rice fields and thus rice farmers face challenges in rice straw disposal. Using rice straw as a
livestock feed is not a favorable option because of its poor quality. Incorporating rice straw in soil can
be costly and can pose other challenges to rice farmers [12]. Using rice straw to produce natural fibers
for concrete application can benefit both the rice industry as well as the concrete industry.
This research aims to investigate the impact of washed and unwashed rice straw fibers (RSFs) on
concrete properties. Different percentages of RSFs were added in concrete. Two water-to-cement ratios
and two different fiber sizes were used. Compressive strength, flexural strength, heat of hydration,
and drying shrinkage of concrete containing RSFs were measured and compared with that of concrete
with no RSF.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials
Type II/V Portland cement, conforming to ASTM C150 [13], was used in this study. Chemical
and physical properties of cement are shown in Table 1. A 1 inch (25 mm) maximum size aggregate
was used. Rice straw was obtained from a local farm and was ground into two different sizes of
approximately 5 mm (coarse RSF) and 2 mm (fine RSF). Figure 1 shows pictures of coarse and fine
RSF. Coarse RSF and fine RSF will be referred to as RSF-C and RSF-F, respectively. Two different
water-to-cement ratios (w/c) of 0.54 and 0.42 were used. Saturated surface dry (SSD) course aggregate
and oven-dried sand were used for all concrete mixtures; this was done to better control the water
content of the mixtures. Sand water absorption was taken into consideration when calculating water
content for concrete mixtures. The aggregate and sand contents for concrete mixtures with a w/c of
0.54 were 994 kg/m3 and 831 kg/m3 , respectively. Concrete mixtures with a w/c of 0.42 contained
1058 kg/m3 of aggregate and 817 kg/m3 of sand. Table 2 shows proportions of concrete mixtures.

Table 1. Chemical composition of cement used.

Silicon Dioxide (SiO2 )% 21.3

Aluminum Oxide (Al2 O3 )% 3.9
Calcium Oxide (CaO)% 63.2
Ferric Oxide (Fe2 O3 )% 3.8
Magnesium Oxide (MgO)% 2.2
Sulfur Trioxide (SO3 )% 2.3
Loss on Ignition (LOI)% 2
Total Alkali 0.49
Limestone% 3.1
Blaine Fineness (m2 /kg) 380
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 3 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 13

Figure 1. Coarse (left) and fine rice straw fibbers.

Figure 1. Coarse (left) and fine rice straw fibbers.

Table 2. Concrete mixture proportions (per cubic meters).

Table 2. Concrete mixture proportions (per cubic meters).
RSF-C RSF-F
Cement
Cement RSF-C RSF-F
Mix
Mix ID IDw/c w/c (kg) RSF Water Added Water Added
(kg) RSF% RSF% RSF (kg)
RSF% RSF (kg) Water Added to RSF (kg) RSF% RSF (kg) Water Added to RSF (kg)
(kg) to RSF (kg) to RSF (kg)
Mix #1 0.54 329.1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mix
Mix #2 #1 0.420.54371.7 329.1 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 00
Mix
Mix#3 #2 0.540.42329.1 371.7 1 03.4 0 16.5 0 00 0 0 00
Mix #4
Mix #30.540.54329.1 329.1 2 16.7 3.4 32.8
16.5 0
0 0
0 0
0
Mix #5 0.54 329.1 3 9.9 49.3 0 0 0
Mix
Mix #6 #4 0.420.54371.7 329.1 1 23.7 6.7 18.632.8 00 0 0 00
Mix
Mix #7 #5 0.420.54371.7 329.1 2 37.4 9.9 37.249.3 00 0 0 00
Mix
Mix#8 #6 0.420.42371.7 371.7 3 111.2 3.7 55.818.6 00 0 0 00
Mix #9 0.54 329.1 0 0 0 1 3.4 16.5
Mix #7
Mix 0.42 371.7 2 7.4 37.2 0 0 0
0.54 329.1
Mix #8 0.42
#10 371.7 0 30 11.2 0
55.8 2
0 6.7
0 32.8
0
Mix
Mix #90.540.54329.1 329.1 0 00 0 0 0 31 9.9 3.4 16.5
49.3
#11
Mix
Mix
#10 0.54 329.1 0 0 0 2 6.7 32.8
Mix 0.42 371.7 329.1 0 00 0 0 13 3.7 9.9 18.6
#12 #11 0.54 0 49.3
Mix
Mix #120.420.42371.7 371.7 0 00 0 0 0 21 7.4 3.7 18.6
37.2
#13
Mix #13 0.42 371.7 0 0 0 2 7.4 37.2
Mix
Mix 0.42 371.7 371.7 0 00 0 0 33 11.2 11.2 55.8
#14 #14 0.42 0 55.8

2.2.
2.2. Methods
Methods

2.2.1. Concrete Mixing Procedure

Dry RSF was saturated with water 30 min before adding to the concrete
concrete mix.
mix. The amount of
water added to RSFs was 5-times the weight of RSFs. This amount of water was enough to make RSF
saturated
saturated to
to make
make sure
sure fibers
fibers did
did not
not absorb
absorb water
water during
during mixing.
mixing. RSF
RSF was
was then
then mixed
mixed with
with sand,
sand,
aggregate
aggregate and
and about
about one-third
one-third of
of the
the mix
mix water
water for
for aa minute
minute to
to ensure even distribution
ensure even distribution of
of fibers
fibers
within the mix.
within the mix. Cement
Cement and
and the remaining mix
the remaining mix water
water were
were then
then added
added to
to finish
finish the
the mixing
mixing process.
process.

RSF Washing Procedure

2.2.2. RSF
(unwashed) RSF
As received (unwashed) RSF and
and washed
washed RSFRSF were
were used
used in
in this
this study.
study. To
To wash
wash RSF,
RSF, 200 g of
immersed in 3500 mL of water in a four-liter glass jar at 23 ◦°C
ground RSF was immersed C for 24 h. Then, RSF
twice and
anddried
driedininan
anoven
ovenatat100 ◦ C. Samples of leachate were collected and analyzed
100°C.
was rinsed twice Samples of leachate were collected and analyzed to
to determine
determine thethe amount
amount of sodium,
of sodium, potassium,
potassium, totaltotal organic
organic carbon,
carbon, andand phosphorous.
phosphorous. Sodium
Sodium and
and potassium
potassium werewere analyzed
analyzed usingusing Inductively
Inductively Coupled
Coupled PlasmaPlasma
Atomic Atomic Emission
Emission Spectroscopy
Spectroscopy (ICP-
AES); phosphorous content was obtained using a spectrophotometer. A Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
analyzer was used to determine TOC content of the leachates. Washed samples were designated with
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 4 of 13

(ICP-AES); phosphorous content was obtained using a spectrophotometer. A Total Organic Carbon
(TOC) analyzer was used to determine TOC content of the leachates. Washed samples were designated
with a letter “W” at the end of the sample name; for example RSF-C-W means coarse rice straw fiber
which was washed before adding to concrete; RSF-F-W indicates fine rice straw fiber which was
washed before adding to concrete. As received (unwashed) samples have no “W” letter in their name.

2.2.3. Experimental Procedures

Compressive strength tests were performed on 100 mm × 200 mm (4 × 8 inch) cylinders according
to ASTM C39 [14]. Flexural tests were conducted in accordance with ASTM C78 [15]. Drying
shrinkage tests were performed following ASTM C157/157M, except that concrete prisms samples
were wet-cured for one week and then moved to a drying chamber (50% RH) for four more weeks [16].
Heat of hydration measurements were performed using a four-channel isothermal calorimeter
at 23 ◦ C to determine the impact of RSF addition on cement induction period. Approximately 50 g
of cement paste samples with and without RSF were used to measure heat of hydration. A 0.45
water-cementitious material ratio (w/cm) was used. Paste samples were mixed with a vertical
laboratory mixer [17]. Distilled water was added to the cementitious material and mixed at 500 rpm for
120 s, followed by a 60 s rest period, and then mixed for 60 s. To obtain the induction period, the slope
of the acceleration peak of heat of hydration was extended to the x-axis (time axis). The intersection
point between the extended slope and x-axis was considered as the induction period [18].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Impact of RSF Addition on Concrete Heat of Hydration

Isothermal heat of hydration of cementitious systems are commonly used to study various
properties of these systems. In particular, heat of hydration graphs are used to obtain the induction
(dormant) period of cementitious systems. Induction period of cementitious systems is a time frame
during which hydration of cement slows down. During the induction period concrete is in plastic
(workable) state, and this enables concrete to be transported, placed, and finished. Although the
induction period can vary depending on the application, it typically lasts up to 4 h.
Isothermal heat of hydration of samples containing RSF-C and RSF-F are shown in Figures 2 and 3,
respectively. Addition of RSF prolonged the induction period. The higher the amount of RSF in the
system, the longer the induction period would be. As can be seen in Figure 2, paste samples containing
1% of RSF-C showed a small increase in induction period. However, the induction period for samples
with 3% RSF-F was around 70 h. It was also found that RSF-F had a more noticeable effect on retardation
compared to RSF-C. For example, comparing the induction period of paste samples containing 3%
RSF-C (Figure 2) with those of 3% RSF-F (Figure 3), one can see that samples with RSF-F have a much
longer induction period (almost 60 h longer). Samples containing 1% RSF-C had negligible impact
on retardation time; nevertheless, adding 1% of RSF-F to paste samples increased the induction
period by about 5 h compared to the control sample (OPC). This could be because RSF-F is finer than
RSF-C; a higher amount of inorganic impurities (such as Na and K) and organic contents (such as
hemicellulose) could be leached out of RSF-F into the pore solution which could lead to longer dormant
period. It is well known that the induction period increases as the organic compounds increase in pore
solution [18].
Sustainability 2018,
Sustainability 10,10,2445
2018, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of513
of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13

Figure2.2.Heat
Figure Heat of hydration
hydration of
of paste
pastesamples
samplescontaining RSF-C.
containing RSF-C.
Figure 2. Heat of hydration of paste samples containing RSF-C.

Figure3.3. Heat
Heat of hydration
hydration of
ofpaste
pastesamples
samplescontaining RSF-F.
Figure 3. Heat of
Figure of hydration of paste samples containing
containing RSF-F.
RSF-F.

Washing RSF before adding to paste samples, however, reduced the induction period of samples
Washing
Washing RSF
RSF beforeadding
before addingto topaste
paste samples,
samples, however,
however,reduced
reducedthe theinduction
induction period
period of of
samples
samples
containing RSF (see Figures 2 and 3). This was more pronounced in samples with fine RSF (RSF-F).
containingRSF
containing RSF(see
(seeFigures
Figures22and and 3).
3). This
This was
was more
more pronounced
pronounced ininsamples
samples with
withfine RSF
fine RSF(RSF-F).
(RSF-F).
For instance, the induction period for paste samples with 3% RSF-F-W was about 3 h, whereas
ForFor instance,
instance, the
the3% induction
induction period
period for paste
for paste samples samples
with with
3%70 3%
RSF-F-WRSF-F-W was about 3 h, whereas
samples with RSF-F had an induction period of about h. The was aboutperiod
induction 3 h, whereas samples
for samples
samples
with 3% withhad
RSF-F 3% anRSF-F had anperiod
induction inductionof period
about 70 of
h. about
The 70 h. Theperiod
induction induction
for period for
samples samples3%
containing
containing 3% RSF-F-W was even less than that of samples containing 1% RSF-F (Figure 3). The
containing 3%
RSF-F-W RSF-F-W thanwas even less than that of samples containing 1%TheRSF-F (Figure 3). The
decreasewas even less period
in induction that
dueoftosamples
washingcontaining 1% RSF-F
could be attributed (Figure
to removal 3). of somedecrease in induction
of the inorganic
decrease in induction period due to washing could be attributed to removal of some of the inorganic
period due to washing
and organic compounds could
frombe attributed
RSF by washingto removal
method.of some
Tableof3 the inorganic
shows and organic
the amount of sodium compounds
(Na),
and organic compounds from RSF by washing method. Table 3 shows the amount of sodium (Na),
from RSF by washing method. Table 3 shows the amount of sodium (Na), potassium
potassium (K), phosphorous (P), and total organic carbon (TOC) that were leached out of RSF-C and (K), phosphorous
potassium (K), phosphorous (P), and total organic carbon (TOC) that were leached out of RSF-C and
(P), and by
RSF-F total organicAscarbon
washing. can be(TOC) that were
seen, more organicleached out of RSF-C
and inorganic and RSF-F
compounds by washing.
were leached As can
from RSF-
RSF-F by washing. As can be seen, more organic and inorganic compounds were leached from RSF-
beFseen, more organic
compared to RSF-C; and inorganic
this is because compounds
the RSF-F were leached
is finer comparedfrom toRSF-F
RSF-C.compared
Removaltoof RSF-C;
higherthis
F compared to RSF-C; this is because the RSF-F is finer compared to RSF-C. Removal of higher
is amount
because of TOC
the from
RSF-F is RSF-F by washingtocould
finer compared be Removal
RSF-C. the reasonofwashing
higher impact
amountonofretardation
amount of TOC from RSF-F by washing could be the reason washing impact on retardation time of
TOC fromtime of by
RSF-F
samples
washing containing RSF-F was more noticeable compared to those samples containing RSF-C.
samplescould be theRSF-F
containing reason waswashing impact on
more noticeable retardation
compared timesamples
to those of samples containing
containing RSF-C. RSF-F was
more noticeable compared to those samples containing RSF-C.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 6 of 13

Table 3. RSF leachate analysis.

Sustainability2018,
Sustainability 2018,10,
10,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 66of
of13
13
Sample ID Na K P TOC
Table3.
Table 3.RSF
RSFleachate
leachateanalysis.
analysis.
Average 145 882 93 2357
RSF-C
Sample ID
St. Div.
Sample ID 6 Na K
Na K31 PP TOC
TOC 3 40
Average Average
Average211 145
145 882
882 93
986 93 2357
2357
127 2562
RSF-F RSF-C
RSF-C
St. Div. St. Div.
St. Div.
10 66 31
3162 33 4011
40 201
Average
Average
Note: 211 986
211 986
St. Div.= standard 127
127
deviation. 2562
2562
RSF-F
RSF-F St. Div.
St. Div. 10
10 62
62 11
11 201
201
Note:St.
St. Div.=
Div.=standard
standarddeviation.
deviation.
3.2. Impact of RSF Addition on ConcreteNote:
Strength
3.2. Impact
Figure
3.2. Impact of RSF
4 presents
of RSF Addition
Addition on Concrete
Concretestrength
the compressive
on Strength data for concrete samples containing course rice straw
Strength
fiber (RSF-C)Figure
Figure and fine ricethe
44 presents
presents straw
the fiber (RSF-F)
compressive
compressive strength
strength with data
data w/cfor of
for 0.42. samples
concrete
concrete Figure
samples5containing
shows the
containing compressive
course
course rice
rice
strength
straw data
fiber for concrete
(RSF-C) and samples
fine rice containing
straw fiber RSF-C
(RSF-F) withandw/c RSF-F
of with
0.42. Figurew/c
straw fiber (RSF-C) and fine rice straw fiber (RSF-F) with w/c of 0.42. Figure 5 shows the compressive5 of
shows0.54.
the As can
compressive be seen
from strength
Figures
strengthdata 4data
and for concrete samples containing RSF-C and RSF-F with w/c of 0.54. As can be seen from to
for5, samples
concrete containing
samples RSF-C
containing showed
RSF-C and a lower
RSF-F compressive
with w/c of 0.54. strength
As can be compared
seen from
Figures
control samples
Figures 4 and
4 and 5,samples
5, samples
(samples containing
without
containing RSF-C
anyRSF-C showed
RSF). showed
This aalower
is truelower compressive
regardless
compressive strength
of w/c compared
and sample
strength compared age.tocontrol
to control
The higher
samplesof
samples
the amount (samples
(samples without
RSF in without
concrete, any
any RSF).
RSF).
the Thisthe
This
lower is true
is true regardlessstrength.
regardless
compressive of w/c
of w/c and
andSamples
sample age.
sample age. The higher
The
containing higher
1%thethe
RSF-F
amount
amount of
of RSF
RSF in
in concrete,
concrete, the
the lower
lower the
the compressive
compressive strength.
strength. Samples
Samples
had similar compressive strength to those without RSF (Figures 4 and 5). However, addition of 2% containing
containing 1%
1% RSF-F
RSF-F had
had
similar compressive
compressive strength
strength toto those without
without RSF RSF (Figures
(Figures 44 and
and 5). However,
However, addition
addition ofof 2%
2% oror 3%
3%
or 3%similar
RSF-F reduced the concretethose strength compared to control5).samples. Comparing RSF-C with
RSF-Freduced
RSF-F reducedthe theconcrete
concretestrength
strengthcompared
comparedto tocontrol
controlsamples.
samples.Comparing
ComparingRSF-C RSF-Cwith
withRSF-F
RSF-Fone one
RSF-F one can see that, for a given percentage of RSF addition, samples containing RSF-F have higher
can see
can see that,
that, for
for aa given
given percentage
percentage of of RSF
RSF addition,
addition, samples
samples containing
containing RSF-F
RSF-F have
have higher
higher
compressive
compressive strength thanthan
strength those
thosecontaining
containingRSF-C.
RSF-C.
compressive strength than those containing RSF-C.

Figure
Figure 4.Compressive
Compressivestrength
4. Compressive
Figure 4. strength data
strength data for
data for w/c
forw/c
w/c == 0.42.
0.42.
= 0.42.

Figure 5. Compressive strength data for w/c = 0.54.

Figure 5. Compressivestrength
strength data
Figure 5. Compressive data for
forw/c
w/c = 0.54.
= 0.54.
Sustainability 2018, 10,
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 7 of
of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 7 of 13
13

The impact
The impact of
of washing
washing onon compressive
compressive strength
strength is
is presented
presented in
in Figures
Figures 66 and
and 7.
7. As
As can
can be seen,
seen,
The impact of washing on compressive strength is presented in Figures 6 and 7. As can be
be seen,
for a given
for aa given age
given age and
age and dosage
and dosage
dosage ofof RSF,
of RSF, samples
RSF, samples containing
samples containing RSF-C-W
containing RSF-C-W
RSF-C-W hadhad slightly
had slightly higher
slightly higher compressive
higher compressive
compressive
for
strength compared
strength compared toto those
those containing
containing RSF-C.
RSF-C. Considering
Considering compressive
compressive strength
strength at
at 77 days,
days, samples
samples
strength
with compared
RSF-C-W wereto10%
those containing
stronger than RSF-C.
those Considering
containing compressive
RSF-C. This strength
could be at 7 days,
because of samples
removal of
with RSF-C-W
with RSF-C-W were
were 10%
10% stronger
stronger than
than those
those containing
containing RSF-C.
RSF-C. This
This could
could be
be because
because ofof removal
removal ofof
some
some ofof inorganic
of inorganic impurities
inorganic impurities and
impurities and organic
organic compounds
compounds from
from the
the rice
rice straw during
straw during washing procedure.
washing procedure.
some
However, samples containing and organic (washed
RSF-F-W compounds fromhas
RSF-F) thesimilar
rice straw during washing
compressive strength procedure.
to those
those
However,
However,
samples
samples
containing
containing
RSF-F-W
RSF-F-W
(washed RSF-F) has similar compressive strength
(washed RSF-F) has similar compressive strength to those
to
containing RSF-F (refer to Figure
containing RSF-F (refer to Figure 7). 7).
containing RSF-F (refer to Figure 7).

Figure
Figure 6. Compressive
Figure6.
6. Compressivestrength
Compressive strengthof
strength ofsamples
of samplescontaining
samples containingwashed
containing washedand
washed andunwashed
and unwashedRSF-C
unwashed RSF-C(w/c
RSF-C (w/c =
(w/c 0.54).
= 0.54).

Figure7.
Figure
Figure 7. Impact
7. Impact of
Impact of washing
of washingon
washing oncompressive
on compressivestrength
compressive strengthof
strength ofsamples
of samplescontaining
samples containingRSF-F
containing RSF-F(w/c
RSF-F (w/c =
(w/c 0.54).
= 0.54).

3.3. Impact
3.3. Impact of
of RSF
RSF Addition
Addition on
on Concrete
Concrete Flexural
Flexural Strength
Strength
Strength
Figures 88 and
Figures and 999 show
and show rapture
show rapture strength
rapture strength (flexural
strength (flexuralstrength)
(flexural strength)of
strength) ofconcrete
of concretesamples
concrete sampleswith
samples withw/c
with w/c of
w/c of 0.42
0.42
and 0.54,
and 0.54, respectively.
0.54, respectively. For
respectively. For aa given
given w/c,
given w/c, samples
w/c, samples containing
samples containing either
either RSF-C
containing either RSF-C oror RSF-F
RSF-F showed
showed lower
lower
rupture strength compared
rupture strength compared
compared to to controls
to controls samples.
controls samples. Concrete samples containing RSF-F showed
samples. Concrete samples containing RSF-F showed a lower a lower
flexural
flexural strength
flexural strength compared
strength compared
compared to to those
to those containing
those containing RSF-C;
containing RSF-C; the opposite was true for compressive strength
RSF-C; the opposite was true for compressive strength
(see Figures
(see Figures
Figures 4
4 and
and 5).
5). Figures
Figures 8
8 and
and 9
9 also
also indicate
indicate that flexural
that flexural strength
strength of
of concrete
concrete samples
samples reduced
reduced
as the percentage
as the percentage
percentage ofof RSF
of RSF in
RSF in concrete
in concrete increased.
concrete increased.
increased.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 8 of 13
Sustainability 2018,
Sustainability 2018, 10,
10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 88 of
of 13
13

Figure8.
Figure
Figure 8.Rupture
8. Rupturestrength
Rupture strengthof
strength ofsamples
of sampleswith
samples withw/c
with w/c === 0.42.
w/c 0.42.

Figure 9.Rupture
Figure9.
Figure 9. Rupturestrength
Rupture strengthof
strength ofsamples
of sampleswith
samples withw/c
with w/c === 0.54.
w/c 0.54.

3.4. Impact
3.4. Impact of
of RSF
RSF Addition
Addition on
on Concrete
Concrete Drying
DryingShrinkage
Shrinkage
Drying shrinkage
Drying shrinkage of of concrete
concrete prisms
prisms for
for w/c
w/c of
w/c of 0.42
0.42 and
and 0.54
0.54 isis shown
shown in in Figures
Figures 10 and 11,
10 and 11,
respectively.ItIt
respectively.
respectively. Itwas
wasshown
was shownthat,
shown that,for
that, foraaagiven
for givenw/c,
given w/c, samples
w/c, containing RSF
samples containing
containing RSF had
had higher
higher drying
drying shrinkage
shrinkage
compared to
compared to those
those without
without RSF,RSF, regardless
regardless of of dosage
dosage and
dosage and type
type ofof RSF
of RSF (RSF-F
RSF (RSF-F or
(RSF-F or RSF-C).
or RSF-C). Drying
RSF-C). Drying
shrinkage increased
shrinkage increased as as the
theamount
the amountof
amount ofRSF
of RSFin
RSF inconcrete
in concreteincreased.
concrete increased.For
increased. Forw/c
For w/c =
w/c == 0.42
0.42 samples
samples containing
containing
RSF-F had
RSF-F had lower
lower drying
lowerdrying shrinkage
dryingshrinkage
shrinkage than
than those
those
than containing
containing
those RSF-C
RSF-C
containing (refer(refer
(refer
RSF-C to Figure
to Figure 10). However,
10).
to Figure However, for w/c
for
10). However,w/c
=
for0.54,
= 0.54,
w/c samples
samples containing
= 0.54,containing RSF-F
samples RSF-F showed
showed
containing higher
higher
RSF-F drying shrinkage
dryinghigher
showed shrinkage compared
compared
drying to those
to those
shrinkage containing
containing
compared RSF-
RSF-
to those
CC (Figure
(Figure 11).
containing 11).
RSF-C (Figure 11).
Figures 12
Figures 12 and
and 1313 compare
compare drying
drying shrinkage
shrinkage of of samples
samples containing washed and
containing washed and unwashed
unwashed RSF.
RSF.
As can
As can be be seen,
be seen,
seen, forfor both
for both RSF-F
both RSF-F
RSF-F andand RSF-C,
and RSF-C, washing
RSF-C, washing reduced
washing reduced drying
reduced drying shrinkage.
drying shrinkage. Nonetheless, control
shrinkage. Nonetheless, control
samples still
samples still had
hadthethelowest
lowestdrying
dryingshrinkage.
drying shrinkage.
shrinkage.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 9 of 13
Sustainability 2018,
Sustainability 2018, 10,
10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 99 of
of 13
13

Figure10.
Figure
Figure 10.Drying
10. Dryingshrinkage
Drying shrinkagedata
shrinkage datafor
data forw/c
for w/c =
w/c == 0.42.
0.42.
0.42.

Figure11.
Figure
Figure 11.Drying
11. Dryingshrinkage
Drying shrinkagefor
shrinkage forsamples
for sampleswith
samples withw/c
with w/c == 0.54.
w/c 0.54.

Figure 12.Drying
Figure12.
Figure 12. Dryingshrinkage
Drying shrinkageof
shrinkage ofsamples
of samplescontaining
samples containingwashed
containing washedand
washed andunwashed
and unwashedRSF-C
unwashed RSF-C(w/c
RSF-C (w/c=
(w/c == 0.54).
0.54).
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 10 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13

Figure 13.Drying
Figure13. Dryingshrinkage
shrinkageofofsamples
samplescontaining
containingunwashed
unwashedand
andwashed
washedRSF-F
RSF-F(w/c
(w/c==0.54).
0.54).

3.5.Discussion
3.5. Discussionon
onImpact
ImpactofofRSF
RSFon
onStrength
Strengthand
andDrying
DryingShrinkage
ShrinkageofofConcrete
Concrete
Reduction of
Reduction of concrete
concrete compressive
compressive and and flexural
flexural strengths
strengths and and increase
increase ofof concrete
concrete drying
drying
shrinkagecaused
shrinkage causedby byaddition
additionof ofRSF
RSF(either
(eitherRSF-C
RSF-Cor orRSF-F)
RSF-F)could couldbe beattributed
attributedto toseveral
severalfactors.
factors.
Samplescontaining
Samples containingRSF RSFhad hadhigher
highertotal
totalwater
water(mix(mixwater
waterplus pluswater
wateradded
addedto toRSF
RSFbefore
beforemixing)
mixing)
contentcompared
content comparedto tocontrol
controlsamples
samples(samples
(sampleswithout
withoutRSF). RSF).For Forinstance,
instance,Mix Mix#4 #4(sample
(samplewith with2% 2%
RSF-C)had
RSF-C) had177.7
177.7kg/m 3
kg/m (0.54
3 (0.54 × × 329.1) of of mix
mix water
water and and32.832.8kg/m 3
kg/m of water
3 water added
added to toRSFRSFbefore
before
mixingtotosaturate
mixing saturatethe theRSF;
RSF;this
thisbrings
bringsthe thetotal
totalwater
watercontent
contenttoto 210.5
210.5 kg/m
kg/m 3 .3.During
Duringthe themixing
mixing
process,ititwas
process, wasobserved
observedthat thatsome
someof ofthe
thewater
wateraddedaddedto toRSFRSFsqueezed
squeezedout outof ofRSF.
RSF.An Anincrease
increasetoto
initialslump
initial slump and and bleed water was was observed
observedas asaaresult
resultofofthis. Assuming
this. Assuming that all all
that water added
water addedto RSF
to
squeezed
RSF squeezed out ofoutRSF during
of RSF mixing/consolidation
during mixing/consolidation process, the effective
process, w/c (total
the effective w/cwater/total cement)
(total water/total
of Mix #4
cement) ofbecomes 0.64 (210.5/329.1).
Mix #4 becomes This w/c isThis
0.64 (210.5/329.1). much higher
w/c than higher
is much 0.54 (w/c of control
than 0.54 (w/c samples). This
of control
could be This
samples). the reason
could be samples containing
the reason samples RSF had lower
containing RSF strength
had lower and strength
higher dryingand higher shrinkage.
dryingIt
should be noted
shrinkage. It shouldthatbe allnoted
waterthatadded to RSFadded
all water might to have
RSFnot beenhave
might squeezed
not beenout squeezed
during mixing and/or
out during
duringand/or
mixing consolidation. It was outsideItthe
during consolidation. was scope
outsideof this study of
the scope to this
determine
study toexactly
determine howexactly
much waterhow
was squeezed
much water wasout of RSF during
squeezed out of RSFmixing andmixing
during samplesand preparation.
samples preparation.
ItItwas
wasalsoalsoobserved
observedthat thatsamples
samplescontaining
containingRSF RSFwere
weremore moreporous
porouscompared
comparedtotocontrol controlsample
sample
(crosssections
(cross sections of beam
of beam samples
samples werewere
visuallyvisually
lookedlooked
at by nakedat byeye naked
to comeeyeuptowith come thisup with this
conclusion).
Cross sections of beam samples with and without RSF are shown in Figure 14. As can be can
conclusion). Cross sections of beam samples with and without RSF are shown in Figure 14. As be
seen,
seen, Figure
Figure 14B (sample
14B (sample with 2% with
RSF-F)2% RSF-F)
is moreisporous
more porous
compared compared
to Figure to14A
Figure 14A (control
(control sample);sample);
a similara
similar
trend wastrend
seen was seen forcontaining
for samples samples containing
RSF-C. Higher RSF-C. Higher
porosity porositycontaining
of samples of samples RSF containing
(either RSF-FRSF
or RSF-C) could be due to the fact that during consolidation water was squeezed out of RSF causingof
(either RSF-F or RSF-C) could be due to the fact that during consolidation water was squeezed out
RSFto
w/c causing
increase, w/cwhich
to increase,
in turnwhich
lead toinhigher
turn lead to higher porosity.
porosity.
ToTovalidate
validatethe theassumption
assumptionofofthe theimpact
impactofofsqueezed
squeezedwater waterfromfromRSF RSFon onconcrete
concretestrength
strengthand and
drying shrinkage, dry RSF was added to concrete (RSF was washed
drying shrinkage, dry RSF was added to concrete (RSF was washed but it was not saturated before but it was not saturated before
addingtotoconcrete
adding concretemix). mix).Figures
Figures15 15andand16 16compare
comparecompressive
compressivestrength strengthand anddrying
dryingshrinkage
shrinkageofof
concrete samples containing RSF-F-W (saturated or damped)
concrete samples containing RSF-F-W (saturated or damped) and samples containing dry RSF (labeledand samples containing dry RSF
(labeled
as RSF-F-W-D).as RSF-F-W-D).
It can be seen It can
thatbesamples
seen that samplesdry
containing containing
RSF havedry RSFcompressive
higher have higherstrengthcompressiveand
strength
lower andshrinkage
drying lower drying shrinkage
compare to thosecompare to those
containing containing
saturated RSF. saturated RSF. This
This is because is because
no extra water no is
extra water is squeezed out of dry RSF in concrete; hence, the effective
squeezed out of dry RSF in concrete; hence, the effective w/c of concrete samples consisting dry RSF is w/c of concrete samples
consisting
lower than drythatRSF is lowerwith
of samples than saturated
that of samples within
RSF. This saturated
turn willRSF. Thisporosity
reduce in turn will reduce porosity
of concrete which
of concrete
leads to higher which leads and
strength to higher
lowerstrength
shrinkage. andHowever,
lower shrinkage.as can be However, as can be15seen
seen in Figures andin 16,Figures
even
15 and 16, even concrete samples containing dry RSF (RSF-F-W-D)
concrete samples containing dry RSF (RSF-F-W-D) showed lower compressive strength and higher showed lower compressive
strength and higher drying shrinkage compared to control samples. This suggests that there are other
factors, besides higher effective w/c, that affect properties of concrete containing RSF.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 11 of 13

drying shrinkage compared to control samples. This suggests that there are other factors, besides
Sustainability 2018,
Sustainability 2018, 10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 11 of
of 13
13
higher effective10, w/c, that affect properties of concrete containing RSF. 11

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Cross section
section of concrete
concrete beams with
with w/c == 0.42;
0.42; (A)
(A) control
control sample;
sample; (B)
(B) sample
sample with
with 2%
2%
Figure 14. Cross
Cross sectionofof concretebeams
beams withw/c
w/c = 0.42; (A) control sample; (B) sample with
RSF-F.
RSF-F.
2% RSF-F.

Figure 15.
Figure 15. Comparing
Comparing compressive
Comparing compressive strength of
compressive strength of samples
samples containing
containing dry
dry RSF
RSF and
and saturated
saturated RSF.
RSF.
RSF.

Figure 16.
Figure Comparing drying
16. Comparing drying shrinkage
shrinkage of
of samples
samples containing
containing dry
dry RSF and saturated
RSF and
and saturated RSF.
saturated RSF.
RSF.

Further evidence
Further evidence that
that addition
addition of
of RSF
RSF to
to concrete
concrete could
could reduce
reduce concrete
concrete strength
strength is
is that
that organic
organic
compounds could
compounds could be
be leached
leached out
out of
of RSF
RSF into
into concrete
concrete pore
pore solution
solution which
which retards
retards cement
cement hydration.
hydration.
Rice straw contains a large quantity of organic compounds such as lignin,
Rice straw contains a large quantity of organic compounds such as lignin, cellulose, and cellulose, and
hemicellulose that
hemicellulose that can
can be
be leached
leached out
out by
by high
high pH
pH solutions
solutions [19–21].
[19–21]. Considering
Considering thethe high
high pH
pH of
of
concrete pore solution, these organic compounds could degrade in concrete, and sugar
concrete pore solution, these organic compounds could degrade in concrete, and sugar molecules molecules
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 12 of 13

Further evidence that addition of RSF to concrete could reduce concrete strength is that organic
compounds could be leached out of RSF into concrete pore solution which retards cement hydration.
Rice straw contains a large quantity of organic compounds such as lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose
that can be leached out by high pH solutions [19–21]. Considering the high pH of concrete pore
solution, these organic compounds could degrade in concrete, and sugar molecules could leach into
the concrete pore solution. These organic molecules having leached into concrete pore solution,
the concrete compressive strength would be low because organic compounds act as set retarders [18].
Besides organic matters, rice straw contains inorganic elements, such as phosphorous, that could also
be leached into concrete pore solution causing retardation. It has been shown that phosphorous is a
cement set-time retarder [22].

4. Conclusions
Isothermal heat of hydration measurements of cement past samples indicated that, for a given
dosage of RSF addition, paste samples containing RSF-F had longer induction period compared to
those containing RSF-C. It was also found that cement paste samples containing washed RSF had
shorter retardation time than those containing unwashed RSF. This was attributable to removal of some
organic and inorganic compounds out of RSF by washing. More organic and inorganic compounds
were leached out of RSF-F than out of RSF-C.
It was also shown that addition of either saturated or dry RSF in concrete reduces compressive
and flexural strengths and increases drying shrinkage of concrete. It was proposed that it was because
saturated RSF was used and water from RSF was squeezed during mixing and sample consolidation.
This squeezed water increased the effective w/c of concrete which leads to lower strength and higher
drying shrinkage. It was also suggested that organic and inorganic matters could be leached from
the RSF into concrete pore solution because of high pH of concrete pore solution; this could also
negatively affect concrete strength. Results indicated that concrete samples containing RSF-F had
higher compressive strength compared to those containing RSF-C. Although washing RSF shortened
the induction period of past samples, washing RSF had insignificant influence of compressive and
flexural strength. Nevertheless, samples containing washed RSF showed lower drying shrinkage
compared to those containing unwashed RSF.

Funding: Funding for this study was provided by California State University Agricultural Research Institute
(ARI) and by California Rice Research Board.
Acknowledgments: The author is thankful to Joanne O’Hara, German Fuentes, Aaron Bacon, and Henry Friemuth
for their help in conducting experiments for this research. The author is grateful to Lehigh Hanson for donating
Portland cement for this study.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. ACI 544.1R. Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete; American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2009.
2. Juarez, A.; Fajardoa, G.; Monroy, S.; Duran-Herrera, A.; Valdez, P.; Magniont, C. Comparative study between
natural and PVA fibers to reduce plastic shrinkage cracking in cement-based composite. Constr. Build. Mater.
2015, 91, 164–170. [CrossRef]
3. Tschegg, M.E. Fracture energy of natural fibre reinforced concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 40, 991–997.
4. Ardanuy, M.; Claramunt, J.; Toledo-Filho, R.-D. Cellulosic fiber reinforced cement-based composites:
A review of recent research. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 79, 115–128. [CrossRef]
5. Gram, H. Methods for reducing the tendency towards embrittlement in sisal fibre concrete. Nord. Concr. Res.
1983, 2, 62–71.
6. Mezencevova, A.; Garas, V.; Nanko, H.; Kurtis, K.E. Influence of Thermomechanical Pulp Fiber Compositions
on Internal Curing of Cementitious Materials. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2012, 24, 970–975. [CrossRef]
7. Filho, R.D.T.; Ghavami, K.; Sanjuan, M.A.; England, G.L. Free, restrained and drying shrinkage of cement
mortar composites reinforced with vegetable fibres. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2005, 27, 537–546. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018, 10, 2445 13 of 13

8. Khorami, M.; Ganjian, E. Comparing flexural behaviour of fibre–cement composites reinforced bagasse:
Wheat and eucalyptus. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 3661–3667. [CrossRef]
9. Mohr, J.; Biernacki, J.J.; Kurtis, K.E. Supplementary cementitious materials for mitigating degradation of
kraft pulp fiber-cement composites. Cem. Concr. Res. 2007, 37, 1531–1543. [CrossRef]
10. Mohr, B.J.; Nanko, H.B.; Kurtis, K.E. Durability of thermomechanical fiber-cement composites to wet/dry
cycling. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35, 1646–1649. [CrossRef]
11. Filho, R.D.T.; Scrivener, K.; England, G.L.; Ghavami, K. Durability of alkali-sensitive sisal and coconut fibres
in cement mortar composites. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2000, 22, 127–143. [CrossRef]
12. Blank, S.; Jetter, K.; Wick, C.; Williams, J. With a ban on burning, incorporating rice straw into soil may
become disposal option for growers. Calif. Agric. 1993, 47, 8–12.
13. ASTM C150. Standard Specification for Portalnd Cement; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 2009.
14. ASTM C39. Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens; ASTM International:
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
15. ASTM C78/78M. Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam with Third-Point
Loading); ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2016.
16. C157/157M. Standard Test Method for Length Change of Hardened Hydraulic-Cement Mortar and Concrete; ASTM
International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2014.
17. Riding, K.; Silva, D.; Scrivener, K. Early age strength of blend cement systems by CaCl2 and
diethanol-isopropanolmine. Cem. Concr. Res. 2010, 40, 935–946. [CrossRef]
18. Ataie, F.F.; Juenger, M.C.; Taylor-Lange, S.C.; Riding, K.A. Comparison of the retarding mechanisms of
zinc oxide and sucrose on cement hydration and interactions with supplementary cementitious materials.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2015, 72, 128–136. [CrossRef]
19. Ataie, F.F.; Riding, K.A. Thermochemical Pretreatments for Agricultural Residue Ash Production for Concrete.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2012, 25, 1703–1711. [CrossRef]
20. Ataie, F.F.; Riding, K.A. Impact of pretreatments and enzymatic hydrolysis on agricultural residue ash
suitability for concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 58, 25–30. [CrossRef]
21. Zheng, Y.; Pan, Z.; Zhang, R. Overview of biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production. Int. J.
Agric. Boil. Eng. 2009, 2, 51–68.
22. Ataie, F.; Riding, K. Use of bioethanol byproduct for supplementary cementitious material production.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 51, 89–96. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the author. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).