Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 46

Accepted Manuscript

Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing binary and


ternary blended cement

Javad Nodeh Farahani, Payam Shafigh, Belal Alsubari, Sheida Shahnazar, Hilmi Bin
Mahmud

PII: S0959-6526(17)30291-3
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.077
Reference: JCLP 9003

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Please cite this article as: Javad Nodeh Farahani, Payam Shafigh, Belal Alsubari, Sheida Shahnazar,
Hilmi Bin Mahmud, Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing binary and
ternary blended cement, (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.077

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing binary


2 and ternary blended cement

3 Javad Nodeh Farahani a, *, Payam Shafigh b, c, Belal Alsubari a, Sheida Shahnazar d, Hilmi Bin
4 Mahmuda

PT
a
5 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
6 Department of Building Surveying, Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
c
7 Center for Building Science, Technology and Performance, Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala

RI
8 Lumpur, Malaysia 

d
9 Institute of Graduate Studies, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
10 *Corresponding author: Email: j_farahani_my@yahoo.com, Tel: +601111859965, Fax: +60379675713

SC
11

12 ABSTRACT

U
13 Lightweight concrete (LAWC) has numerous advantages over normal weight concrete (NWC),

14
AN
such as less dead load and construction costs. Using lightweight aggregates (LWA) is one of the
M
15 most typical methods of fabricating structural LWAC. This paper studies the possibility of

16 LAWC production by agricultural solid waste, specifically oil palm shell (OPS) and also by
D

17 replacing ordinary Portland cement (OPC) with rice husk ash (RHA) and fly ash (FA) up to 50%.
TE

18 The effect of cement replacement with 0%, 10%, 20% and 30% of RHA (binary blended cement)

19 and with 15%FA/15%RHA and 25%FA/25%RHA (ternary blended cement) on several


EP

20 engineering properties (workability, density, compressive strength, flexural strength, water

21 absorption, drying shrinkage and ultrasonic pulse velocity) of OPS concrete was analyzed. The
C

22 impact of 2, 4, and 6 days of water curing on 28-day compressive strength was examined as well.
AC

23 This study proved the possibility of fabricating sustainable LAWC made of high volume

24 agricultural and industrial waste materials. Although the high amount of RHA in OPS Concrete

25 caused reduction of compressive strength and workability, incorporating FA along with RHA

26 addressed this issue. OPS concrete showed to be more sensitive to curing and only 4-day initial

1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 curing decreased the strength reduction up to 26 % compare to air dry curing. Grades 30 (with

2 OPC content of 350 kg/m^3) and 25 (with OPC content of 250 kg/m^3) green LAWC were

3 successfully produced by incorporating 30% and 50% of RHA/FA respectively. In addition,

4 significant CO2 reduction, as high as 41%, is calculated in this work to be emitted for

PT
5 manufacturing studied sustainable concretes.

RI
6 Keywords: Oil Palm Shell; Lightweight Concrete; Lightweight Aggregate; Fly Ash; Rice Husk

7 Ash; Supplementary Cementitious Material

SC
8 1.0 Introduction

U
9 Concrete, as the most common construction material, exhibits outstanding mechanical and

10
AN
physical characteristics which are the main reasons for its popularity. The elements of structural
M
11 concrete have the potential to be shaped into a wide range of sizes and patterns. Concrete is a

12 highly cost-effective and easily accessible substance for the operation and it has outstanding
D

13 resistant to water as well (Mehta and Monteiro, 2006). However, the considerable interest in
TE

14 using normal weight concrete (NWC), caused the excessive consumption of aggregates like

15 granite and gravel, which in turn tremendously decreased natural stone deposits, and resulted in
EP

16 irreversible destruction of the environment (Alengaram et al., 2013). Therefore, replacing

17 conventional aggregates with more sustainable materials are being constantly studied (Hamidian
C

18 et al., 2016; Shafigh et al., 2016).


AC

19 Developed countries have been utilizing the lightweight concrete (LAWC) for many years.

20 Using lightweight aggregate (LWA) is the most popular approach for manufacturing LAWC.

21 Conventional aggregates could be replaced either partially or totally by LWA (Kılıç et al., 2003;

22 Polat et al., 2010; Shafigh et al., 2013a) . There are number of advantages in using LWAC as a

2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 substitute for NWC , for example, construction cost saving thanks to the reduction of dead

2 weight, as well as being thermally isolated, freeze–thaw resistant, and having lesser handling

3 expenses (Bingol and Gul, 2004). Reducing the structure/building dead load, which could be

4 attained by using LAWC, is of utmost importance, considering this fact that earthquake forces

PT
5 are proportional to structures’ weight (Kılıç et al., 2003). Dead load reduction by using LWA in

RI
6 concrete will reduce the columns cross-section, beams and foundations which will reduce the

7 steel bar reinforcement in concrete (Topçu, 1997).

SC
8 Many industrial and agricultural wastes (e.g. diatomite, pumice, scoria, volcanic cinders,

U
9 coconut shell and tuff) could be used in mix proportion of concrete instead of conventional

10

11
AN
aggregates (Neville and Brooks, 1987). Utilizing the wastes is beneficial in terms of saving

money as well as going Green. Countries with agro-based industries, such as Malaysia,
M
12 Indonesia, and Thailand are ideal places to invest in this area by virtue of their high production

13 of agricultural waste , especially Oil Palm Shell (OPS), which is extensively found in these
D

14 tropical countries (Shafigh et al., 2010). OPS is a kind of LWA, having superior impact
TE

15 resistance in contrast to the NWA (Alengaram et al., 2013). Structural LAWCs are defined as

16 having densities of lesser than 2000 kg/m^3, making OPS concrete a suitable choice considering
EP

17 their density which falls within this limit. Compared to the density of NWC which is 2400
C

18 kg/m^3, OPS concrete is roughly 20% lighter (TEO et al., 2006).


AC

19 Employing OPS as LAWC to fabricate concrete was first studied in 1985 by Abdullah in

20 Malaysia (Abdullah, 1984). Malaysia is the second largest producer of palm oil in the world. It

21 has been reported that palm oil industries in Malaysia produce over 4 million tons of OPS

22 annually (Shafigh et al., 2011a). From the results of several studies, OPS has the potential to be

23 employed as coarse aggregate in order to produce structural LAWC (Shafigh et al., 2014b). In

3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 one recent study, it was shown that OPS lightweight aggregate concrete has a compressive

2 strength of between 14 MPa and 40 MPa (Shafigh et al., 2011a). However, Shafigh (Shafigh et

3 al., 2011a) documented that OPS concrete can be produced with high strength ranging from 42 to

4 48 MPa with dry density of 1868 to 1988 kg/m^3.

PT
5 The global usage of Portland cement (OPC) is reported to be around 1.5 billion tons annually

RI
6 and is predicted to get by 2.5 billion tons in 2020 (Mehta and Monteiro, 2006). Production of this

7 volume of cement demands a huge amount of natural resources. In addition, OPC manufacturing

SC
8 consumes a great deal of energy and therefore accounts for major share of CO2 emission (Paris et

U
9 al., 2016). The cement industry is estimated to be responsible for approximately 5-8% of global

10

11
AN
man-made greenhouse gasses emission (for each kg of produced cement, 0.87 kg of carbon is

emitted) (Cai et al., 2016; Damtoft et al., 2008; Supino et al., 2016). Considering all
M
12 aforementioned reasons, alternative materials are being examined to replace portions of OPC

13 which are referred as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) (Meyer, 2005). A significant
D

14 amount of waste materials is being produced worldwide as by-products of various sectors which
TE

15 have the potential to be utilized as SCM.


EP

16 Industrial and agricultural by-products such as rice husk ash (RHA) and fly ash (FA) are

17 recently obtaining a huge interest owing to their application as pozzolan material that typically
C

18 enhances the chemico-physical characteristics of the blended cement concrete, as well as


AC

19 reduction of expenses and negative influences on the environment (Aprianti et al., 2015; Sua-iam

20 and Makul, 2014).

21 One of the main by-products of the agricultural fields is rice husk which is easily accessible in

22 various parts around the globe. In order to reduce rice husk volume it has been extensively

23 applied as fuel in the boiler of electricity power plants and therefore RHA is produced in

4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 significant quantities (Ganesan et al., 2008). Previous studies concluded that RHA is applicable

2 for partial substitution of cement, due to its extremely high silica (SiO2) content which is around

3 90%.(Bui et al., 2005). The RHA’s silica content helps to improve the concrete’s mechanical

4 features (de Sensale, 2006).

PT
5 Moreover, FA is found as the most frequently used pozzolan and is highly in demand for its

RI
6 application around the world in concrete works. FA is produced during the coal combustion in

7 the stations of coal-fired power. Employing fine fly ash highly enhance the characteristics of

SC
8 concrete and mortar (Lee et al., 1999; Targan et al., 2002).

U
9 This communication is intended to investigate the potential of making structural sustainable

10 AN
lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) using high volume waste materials. For this purpose ,

11 OPS has been used as total coarse aggregate and OPC has been replaced by RHA and FA up to
M
12 50%. RHA was selected to be used as a cement replacement in OPS concrete due to lack of

13 information about the effectiveness of using this pozzolanic material on the fresh and hardened
D

14 properties of OPS lightweight concrete. Considering this fact that RHA is a porous material and
TE

15 absorb the mixing water, the use of RHA in different replacement levels in OPS concrete could
EP

16 be interesting. The water absorption of OPS is also very high compared to the other type of

17 lightweight aggregates. However, in contrast to RHA, FA does not absorb mixing water and due
C

18 to being spherical, it improves the workability of concrete. Therefore, it was used as cement
AC

19 replacement together with RHA to compensate workability reduction due to large surface area of

20 RHA as well as to maximize the total volume of waste materials in a structural lightweight

21 aggregate concrete.

5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 2.0 Experimental Work

2 Binder

3 In this work, blends of OPC, RHA, and FA were utilized as binder. The surface area of OPC

PT
4 being used was 3.51 m2/g and its specific gravity was 3.15. Rice husk - obtained from a local

5 rice milling plant - was burnt in ferrocement furnace to produce required RHA. The temperature

RI
6 was controlled by the structure of the furnace. FA used in this work was classified as class F

SC
7 based on ASTM: C618 and was obtained from a local power station.

8 Chemical compositions of OPC, RHA, and FA- resulted from XRF analysis- are being displayed

U
9 in Table 1. Based on Table 1, the main pozzolanic components (SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3) for RHA

10
AN
is 92.5% and for FA is 84.1%, thus addressing ASTM: C618-12a requirements. As it can be

11 observed from the table below, RHA has very high percentage of SiO2 (91%), making it a
M
12 suitable choice to be used as SCM.
D

13
TE

14 Table 1 OPC, RHA and FA compositions (resulted from XRF analysis)

Composition SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO SO3 K 2O MgO Cl P 2O 5 Na2O TiO2


OPC 16.68 4.41 3.64 68.36 4.80 0.37 1.29 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.17
EP

RHA 91.00 0.30 1.19 0.80 0.30 3.17 0.90 0.14 1.96 0.06 0.02
FA 50.24 23.53 10.34 6.95 0.94 1.53 1.84 0.01 0.97 1.56 1.42
15
C

16 Fig.1 shows particle size distribution of FA, RHA, and cement. The particle size of RHA is
AC

17 greater than cement and fly ash. Mean particle sizes of RHA, FA, and cement are 29.61µm, 5.49

18 µm, and 1.89 µm, respectively. According to Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET), the specific

19 surface area of RHA and FA was, 12.25 and 2.04 m²/g. RHA has bigger surface area than OPC

20 and FA. The pore diameter size of OPC was 12.3 nm, RHA was 21.3 nm and FA was 8.2 nm. In

6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 addition, the pore size of these three materials is in the range of 2 nm and 50 nm which is

2 categorized under mesoporous.

PT
RI
U SC
3

4
5
AN
Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of OPC, RHA, and FA
M
6 Aggregates
D

7 The local mining sand having fineness modulus of 3.00, the highest particle size of 4.75 mm, and
TE

8 water absorption of (< 1%) along with specific gravity of 2.55 was employed as fine aggregate in

9 this study. The fine aggregate of zone 2 (Fig. 2.) was used based on experimental works.
EP

10
C
AC

7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
1

SC
2 Fig. 2. Sieve analysis of fine aggregates (Sand)
3

U
4 Coarse aggregates were replaced by OPS. Fig. 3 and Table 2 shows crushed OPS and its sieve

5
AN
analysis, respectively. OPS has been washed and soaked in the water for 24 hours before casting

6 and then dried in the room temperature up to complete drying of the surface. Table 3 displays the
M
7 physical characteristics of OPS.
D

8 Table 2 Sieve Analysis of OPS


TE

Sieve size (mm) Cumulative Percentage passing (By Weight)


20 100
12.5 96.85
EP

9.5 81.5
8 56.16
4.75 13.91
C

2.36 2.46
9
AC

8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
1

SC
2 Fig. 3. Coarse OPS aggregates in different sizes

U
3
4 Table 3 OPS physical properties

Physical property
AN OPS
Specific gravity (saturated surface dry) 1.19
M
Bulk density (kg/m^3) 674
Fineness modulus 5.87
24 hours water absorption (%) 20.6
D

5
TE

6 Superplasticizer
EP

7 Sika ViscoCrete-2199 (modified-polycarboxylate based) was used as superplasticizer (SP). SP

8 was used at 1.0% of the mass of cement for control mix (R0) and 1.5 % for OPS concrete mixes
C

9 incorporating RHA and FA.


AC

10
11 Mix Proportion

12 OPS concretes were produced in six various mix proportions with the main difference in binder

13 content. Table 4 illustrates the mix proportion and slump value for all mixes. Mix R0 is an OPS

14 concrete without SCM. 10% (by mass) of OPC was replaced by RHA to obtain Mix R10

9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 concrete. Mix R20 and R30 has 20% and 30% (by mass) replacement of OPC by RHA. In mix

2 RF15, 30% of cement (by mass) was substituted by FA and RHA. 50% of Mix RF25 binder is

3 supplementary cementitious materials which contain 25% RHA and 25% FA (by mass). Three

4 specimens were used for each individual test except drying shrinkage. Two samples were used

PT
5 for drying shrinkage and three sides of each sample were examined. The total of six reading was

RI
6 collected each time for drying shrinkage.

7 Table 4 OPS concrete mix proportions

SC
Slump Content (kg/m^3)
Mix w/b*
Range
Design OPS Sand OPC RHA FA SP ratio
(mm)

U
R0 324 945 500 0 0 5 0.36
R10 324 945 450 50 0 7.5 0.38
R20
R30
65-85
324
324
945
945
AN400
350
100
150
0
0
7.5
7.5
0.46
0.52
RF15 324 945 350 75 75 7.5 0.37
RF25 324 945 250 125 125 7.5 0.43
M
* Effective water to binder ratio
8
D
TE

9 3.0 Result and Discussion

10 3.1 Microstructural and Morphological Characterization


EP

11 Fig. 4, 5 and 6 show the scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of the OPC, RHA, and FA,

12 respectively. SEM images can provide information about external morphology and crystalline
C

13 structure of the sample (Sivakumar et al., 2009). Fig. 5 depict that FA is made of spherical
AC

14 glasslike particles having a wide range of sizes. The spheres are typically hollow and they appear

15 intact or within some other smaller spheres in their interior. SEM images of RHA show that it

16 consists of pores on the surface and it is amorphous. The pores of RHA and its amorphous shape

10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 result in its higher specific area and therefore higher water demand and its lower workability

2 whereas the spherical shape of FA particle helps to improve the workability of concrete.

3 Accordingly, RHA presence causes the mixture to be over-dried and thus in this study it is used

PT
4 in combination with FA to address this issue.

RI
U SC
5

6
AN
Fig. 4. SEM Images; OPC particles
M
D
TE
EP

8 Fig. 5. SEM Images: FA particles


C
AC

11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
1

RI
2 Fig. 6. SEM Images: RHA particles

SC
3 3.2 Workability and Density

4 The density of all mixes can be found in Table 5. In presence of RHA, inter-particle friction

U
5 increases because particles cannot easily roll over one another which is caused by their

6 AN
agglomerated and crushed shape. Therefore, in order to acquire a workable mix with almost

7 similar slump value of control mix, more water is needed in RHA-containing mixtures. Reduced
M
8 density is one of the consequences of enhanced pore formation which is due to water addition.
D

9 On the contrary, fresh concrete workability boosts by using FA particles, considering this fact

10 that they reduce the binder and fine aggregates friction thanks to their spherical shape. FA
TE

11 spherical shape also helps to minimize surface to volume ratio of the particle which leads to
EP

12 decreased fluid demand. These findings are also confirmed in a work by Sathawane (Sathawane

13 et al., 2013) that showed using FA increases the workability owing to its very low binding
C

14 property and workability of concrete was found to drop in case of RHA content increase
AC

15 From the test result of oven dry density of all six mixes (Table 5), it is observed that the densities

16 of all concretes are significantly lesser than the density of normal aggregates concrete. If we

17 assume that the density of NWC is 2400 kg/m^3, the density of R0, R10, R20, R30, RF15, and

18 RF25 mixes are about 23%, 25%, 28%, 32%, 26%, and 30% respectively lower than normal

12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 weight concrete at the age of 28 days. Therefore, such LAWC significantly reduces the dead load

2 of the structure and in general, it reduced the cost of construction.

3 Crushed particles resulted in higher packing density compared to spherical ones. Hence, in case

PT
4 of spherical particles the water retention is lower and therefore lesser amount of water is required

5 for a particular workability. As it can be seen in Table 5, the density of RF15 increased by 3.9%

RI
6 compared to R30. This shows that 15% FA content of RF15 made the concrete denser due to its

7 physical properties which needs less water content compared to R30. This result is also

SC
8 previously proved by researchers. For example, Mannan and Ganapathy (Mannan and

U
9 Ganapathy, 2004) showed that using 10% and 15% of FA as SCM in OPS concrete, reduce

10

11
AN
density by 2% and 3%, respectively, in addition to 1% and 2% reduction in normal weight of

concrete.
M
12 Furthermore, having lower density compared to OPC, utilizing SCM significantly reduces the

13 weight. Shafigh (Shafigh et al., 2013a) showed how density drops by replacing cement with high
D

14 volume FA (up to 50%) in low water to binder ratio (w/b) OPS concrete. It was also shown that
TE

15 higher replacement levels caused further density reduction.


EP

16

17 Table 5 Demoulded and oven dry density of concrete mixes


C

Density (kg/m^3)
AC

Mix No.
Demoulded Oven Dry
R0 2001 1838
R10 1980 1794
R20 1903 1707
R30 1875 1623
RF15 1949 1774
RF25 1905 1673

13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 3.3 Compressive strength

2 3. 3.1 Continuous moist curing

3 The 28-day compressive strength of R0 was measured to be about 40 MPa, thus the control mix

PT
4 could be considered as high strength LAWC. Fig.7 illustrates the effect of RHA addition to OPS

5 concrete specimens on their compressive strengths up to 90 days. As depicted in this figure, at all

RI
6 ages, the RHA concretes have lower compressive strength compare to control mix (R0). The 28-

7 day compressive strength and the oven dry density of all OPS concretes containing RHA (binary

SC
8 blended cement) varied from 27.2 to 37.7 MPa and from 1623 to 1794 kg/m^3, respectively

U
9 Moreover, at all ages, the compressive strength of RHA-containing OPS concretes decreases

10 AN
with the increase of RHA replacement percentage. In addition, high fineness and porous surface

11 of RHA causes an increase in w/b ratio while the replacement percentage escalate. Previous
M
12 studies have documented these findings as well (Rukzon and Chindaprasirt, 2006; Rukzon et al.,

13 2009; Van et al., 2013).The decline in compressive strength is due to elevated w/b ratio (Table
D

14 4). Fig. 8 shows how RHA replacement level affects compressive strength at 1, 3, 7, 28 and 56
TE

15 days. The figure indicates that the correlation coefficients between these two variables are quite
EP

16 high.

17 The strength of pozzolanic cement depends very much on the formation of cementing agents,
C

18 and any condition that accelerates the formation of dicalcium silicate (C2S) will result in
AC

19 pozzolanic cement having reasonably good strength. Generally, the results from this study show

20 that the compressive strength of OPC and RHA-OPS concretes increase with age. The 1-day

21 compressive strength of mix R10, R20 and R30 are 10.2%, 32% and 50.6% lower than the

22 control mix, and their 28-day compressive strengths are 5.5%, 23.5% and 31.8% lower than

23 control mix, respectively. It should be noted that mix R20 (with an OPC content of 400 kg/m^3

14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 and the 28-day compressive strength of about 30 MPa) has the same compressive strength with

2 Scoria lightweight concrete at the same cement content as reported by Kilic et al. (2003). Scoria

3 is a natural lightweight material of volcanic origin with a vesicular surface texture. R20 also has

4 the same 28-day compressive strength with Cold-bonded fly ash lightweight concrete with a

PT
5 cement content of about 550 kg/m^3 as reported with Gesoğlu et al. (2004).

RI
U SC
AN
M
6
7 Fig. 7. Compressive strength of OPS concretes under water curing
D
TE
C EP
AC

8
9 Fig. 8. OPS concrete compressive strength vs. RHA replacement percentage at different ages.

10

15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 As it was shown in the previous section, using RHA as cement reduces the workability. As a

2 consequence of the RHA porous nature together with its high surface area, the demanded water

3 increases. w/b ratio in addition to RHA replacement percentage are the main determinant of

4 compressive strength.

PT
5 Chindaprasirt (Chindaprasirt and Rukzon, 2008) reported that the mortar strength remarkably

RI
6 improves at later ages and with lower replacement levels, in the case of ternary blended cement.

7 As can be seen from Fig.9, for all mixes containing RHA and FA the compressive strength was

SC
8 lower than that for control mix. However, the mixture containing 15% RHA and 15% FA gives

U
9 the best result. This concrete is in grade 30 and 35 at 28 days and 56 days, respectively. In mix

10

11
AN
RF25, the cement content is 250 kg/m^3. RF25 is classified as grade 25 which is applicable for

many structural works according to British Standard and American Concrete Institute Code of
M
12 Practice. The compressive strength grade of this concrete is equivalent to concrete grade of

13 lightweight expanded clay (LECA) lightweight concrete with a cement content of 350 kg/m^3 as
D

14 reported by Karamloo et al. (2016).


TE
C EP
AC

15
16 Fig.9. Compressive strength development of OPS concrete incorporating of RHA and FA

17

16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Therefore, this study shows that grade 30 green lightweight concrete (having oven dry density of

2 1750 kg/m^3) and grade 25 green concrete (having oven dry density of about 1650 kg/m^3)

3 could be produced by incorporating 30% and 50% of RHA/FA respectively. High volume

4 RHA/FA containing concrete has two main advantages: 1) Being lighter than NWC which has

PT
5 many benefits for construction as previously widely reported (Altwair and Kabir, 2010; Manual,

RI
6 1977; Rossignolo et al., 2003; Shafigh et al., 2011b, 2013b). 2) Being considered as

7 environmentally friendly materials. (Bremner, 2001). That is to say, presence of waste materials

SC
8 in OPS concrete containing RHA/FA (ternary blended cement) as aggregates and cement makes

9 them green products

U
10

11
AN
The amount of cement in mix RF15 is 25-40 % lower than cement content being utilized for

obtaining a same grade of OPS concrete in previous research (Alengaram et al., 2011; Mahmud
M
12 et al., 2009; Mannan and Ganapathy, 2004). The 28-day compressive strength of mix RF25 was

13 28 MPa with only 250 kg/m^3 cement content, which is about 50% lower than what Alengaram
D

14 investigated (Alengaram et al., 2011). He produced OPS concrete with cement content of 510
TE

15 kg/m^3 with 90-day compressive strength of 28 MPa. Furthermore, Sathawane (Sathawane et al.,

16 2013) used 15% FA and 15% RHA as a cement replacement in normal weight concrete with a
EP

17 total cement content of 305 kg/m^3 and he achieved 28 MPa in 28-days.


C

18 Compared to the normal weight concrete, lightweight aggregates mixture should have higher
AC

19 cement content to acquire the same strength (Neville, 2011; Shafigh et al., 2013b). However, it

20 has been reported that based on the type of lightweight aggregate and cementitious material used

21 in the mixture, the cement consumption could be reduced to a low level. For example, in one

22 study by Pelisser et al. (Pelisser et al., 2012), it was shown that by using metakaoline, cement

23 consumption could be reduced to 260 kg/m^3.

17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 From Fig. 5 and 7, the best mix proportion containing cementitious materials could be identified.

2 Based on the compressive strength development, the OPS concrete containing 10% RHA (R10)

3 is the greatest mix proportion which is in Grade 35. However, by considering the high

4 consumption of waste materials as cement, in addition to the development of compressive

PT
5 strength, a mix containing 15% RHA and 15% FA is preferred as the most suitable concrete.

RI
6 Fig.10 shows how 28-days compressive strength is different for various densities of demolded

7 and oven dry RHA-OPS and RHA/FA-OPS concretes. This figure indicates strong linear

SC
8 relationship which exists between compressive strength and two types of densities.

U
AN
M
D
TE
EP

9
10 Fig. 10. Relationship between OPS concrete containing RHA and RHA/FA density and 28-day compressive
11 strength
C

12
AC

13 3.3.2 Curing conditions effect on 28-day compressive strength

14 The satisfactory performance of concrete is much dependent on the curing process (Weber and

15 Reinhardt, 1997). Previous research demonstrated that LAWC has the same curing requirements

16 as NWC (Hoff, 2002). According to ACI-318 (Committee et al., 2008), following the placement

18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 , concrete (other than high-early strength) should be kept in the moist condition above 10 ºC for

2 at least 7 days. However, it should be noted that this ideal period of moist curing is rarely

3 practiced in reality (Türkmen, 2003). Ozer (Ozer and Ozkul, 2004) has also reported that the

4 curing conditions may impact the compressive strengths of both the OPC and pozzolanic cement

PT
5 concretes. Furthermore, Shafigh (Shafigh et al., 2011a) showed that under air curing condition

RI
6 OPS concrete having 28-day compressive of between 42 and 48 MPa, can experience the

7 strength loss up to the range of 14–26%. It was proved by Al-Gahtani et al. (Al-Gahtani, 2010)

SC
8 that sensitivity to water curing for concretes which contain mineral admixtures is higher than

9 OPC concretes. The same result was observed for pulverized fuel ash (PFA) concrete, OPS

U
10 concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag (Shafigh et al., 2013b) and silica fume

11
AN
concrete (Atiş et al., 2005) . Atiş (Atiş et al., 2005) reported that higher water to SCM ratios is

12 because of higher porosity and larger capillary pores and then it lets free-water to evaporate
M
13 rapidly.
D

14 In this investigation, initial water curing (3D, 5D, and 7D) effect on 28-day compressive strength
TE

15 is studied. Table 6 indicates that OPS concretes’ compressive strength is lower in the case of

16 initial water curing than in continuous water curing condition. From the result, it can be seen that
EP

17 under 5D and 7D curing conditions, compressive strength development is almost the same.
C

18 Under all 3 types of initial curing, reference OPS concrete (R0) and mix R10 concrete have
AC

19 almost the same strength. It is because of low SCM content and low w/b ratio of these two

20 mixes. As it is shown in Table 6, mix R20 with 20% of RHA content with 3D curing had almost

21 28% reduction in compressive strength (compared to full water cure) whereas the reduction in its

22 5D cure was only 15%.

19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Table 6 28-days compressive strength (MPa) in various curing conditions

28-days compressive strength (MPa)


Mix Continuous water cure No curing initial water curing
(FC) (AC) (3D) (5D) (7D)
R0 39.9 27.5 30.4 30.6 30.1
R10 37.7 23.9 28.5 29.8 29.3

PT
R20 30.5 20.5 22.1 25.8 26.8
R30 27.2 19.1 23.4 26.0 26.7
RF15 33.2 24.8 28.3 30.4 29.8

RI
RF25 28.5 15.0 20.0 22.4 23.5
2

SC
3 One significant finding of this study is that OPS concrete is more sensitive to lack of curing

4 although having a higher amount of SCM. Nevertheless, it is proved that if the mix is being

U
5 cured under 4-day initial water curing regime (5D), the compressive strength reduction will be

6
AN
much lesser compared to air dry curing (AC). For example, the strength loss for RF25 mix is as
M
7 high as 47% (highest measured strength loss under AC) compared to 21% reduction for the same

8 sample under the 5D curing regime. Thus, even a short curing time for OPS concrete containing
D

9 RHA or RHA/FA is highly effective on strength gain at 28 days. In a work by Teo et al. (Teo et
TE

10 al., 2009) durability performance of OPS concrete (28 MPa compressive strength and 1965

11 kg/m^3 air-dry density) was investigated under various curing conditions. They proved how
EP

12 better durability could be achieved by proper curing process (at least 7 days). Previous studies

13 indicate that lower amount of cement, together with higher OPS content and lesser water to
C

14 cement (w/c) ratio can decrease OPS concrete sensitivity in poor curing conditions (Shafigh et
AC

15 al., 2012). In one study by Shafigh (Shafigh et al., 2013a), it was proved that FA presence in

16 OPS concrete increases the concrete sensitivity to deficiency of curing. Although, initial moist

17 curing can significantly reduce this sensitivity.

20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 3.5 Splitting Tensile Strength

2 The concrete strength is not the only important characteristic which should be taken into account

3 for structural design. For example, in specific applications, namely highway and airfield slabs

4 some other properties such as resistance to cracking, tensile and shear strength are of great

PT
5 importance as well (Neville, 2011). The knowledge of tensile strength is of substantial

RI
6 significance in concrete structures, particularly with regards to crack mitigation. Tensile strength

7 is used to resist shear forces in unreinforced sections; to control cracking in pre-stressed

SC
8 concrete; and to resist shrinkage and thermal stresses (Razak and Wong, 2004). In many non-

9 reinforced concrete structural applications such as concrete damn, pavement, slab and airfield

U
10 runway, the tensile strength of concrete is even more important than its compressive strength

11 (Zain et al., 2002).


AN
M
12 Mahmud (Mahmud, 2010) reported the splitting tensile strength value of 2.0 MPa for OPS

13 concrete with w/b ratio of 0.35 and cement content of 510 kg/m^3 with an additional binder of
D

14 10% silica fume and 5% of fly ash by weight of cement. It was reported in this work that the
TE

15 weaker bond between aggregate–matrix contributes to the lower tensile strength in OPS concrete

16 whereas the rough surface of aggregates increases the bond and thereby increasing tensile
EP

17 strength in normal weight concrete.


C

18 In this study, reference OPS concrete (mix R0) with 500 kg/m^3 cement content proved to have
AC

19 the splitting tensile strength of 3.2 MPa. Fig. 11 illustrates the splitting tensile strength rates from

20 1 day to 7 days increase for all mixes. The splitting tensile strength of mixes R0, R10, R20, R30,

21 RF15, RF25 and RF35 increase at the age of 7 days by 37%, 40%, 73%, 88%, 57% and 88%

22 compared to splitting tensile strength at the age of 1 day. Furthermore, it can be seen from fig. 11

23 that the splitting tensile strength rates for all mixes from 28 days to 90 days did not have a

21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 significant change over the time. According to ASTM: C330, a structural LWAC should have

2 minimum 2.0 MPa of tensile strength. In this study, all mixtures proved to address the ASTM:

3 C330 minimum requirement. The splitting tensile strength of mix R0, R10, R20, R30, RF 15,

4 RF25, RF35 was 3.21, 2.73, 2.03, 2.28 and 2.87, respectively at the age of 28 days. It can be

PT
5 observed from the fig.11 that the increase in the rate of splitting tensile strength with time is

RI
6 more significant when concrete contains more than 30% supplementary cementitious material.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE

7
8 Fig. 11. Splitting tensile strength development for OPS concrete
9
EP

10 Neville (Neville, 2011) showed that tensile strength increases with compressive strength rise,
C

11 though at a decreasing rate. Although tensile strength and compressive strength collate with each
AC

12 other, no direct proportionality exists and their ratio is much dependent on the general level of

13 concrete strength.

14 Most of the previously developed correlations for these two properties are having the below

15 form:

22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2 Where, k and a are equation coefficients and value of a estimated to be in the range of 0.5 and

3 0.75 (Khan and Lynsdale, 2002). The similar form of the equation is suggested by British Code

PT
4 of Practice BS 8007:1987 as well which suggests the values of 0.12 and 0.70 for k and a,

5 respectively. Fig.12 depicts the splitting tensile strength relation with compressive strength. The

RI
6 strong correlation (R2 = 0.95) of this relationship shows that it can be used for accurate

SC
7 prediction of splitting tensile strength from compressive strength.

U
8

9 Where ft = Splitting Tensile Strength (MPa) AN


10 fc = Compressive Strength (MPa)
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

11
12 Fig. 12 Compressive strength vs splitting tensile strength

13
14 Table 7 shows different empirical formula of the relationship between splitting tensile strength

15 and compressive strength of different concretes found by past studies.

23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Fig.13 shows the relation of experimental values of 28-day splitting tensile strength to

2 theoretically predicted ones. As it can be seen, the closest prediction to experimental value is by

3 Eq. 6 which has done by Neville (Neville, 2011). It has been previously stated that the

4 relationship between tensile and compressive strength is dependant on the age and strength of

PT
5 concrete, type of curing, aggregate type, the amount of air entrainment and degree of compaction

RI
6 (Mindes and Young; Zain et al., 2002).

SC
8
9
10 Table 7 Formulated empirical equations by past studies

U
Equation Description No.
AN
OPSC containing original OPS aggregates with cube
Eqn. 1
compressive strength ranging from 17 to 37 MPa
(Shafigh et al., 2010)
M
Crushed OPS concretes with cube compressive
Eqn.2
strength 35 to 53 MPa
(Shafigh et al., 2012)
D

Lightweight expanded polystyrene aggregate


Eqn.3
TE

concretes containing fly ash


(Babu et al., 2005)
Cold-bonded fly ash LWAC with cube compressive
Eqn.4
strength
EP

(Gesoğlu et al., 2004)

OPS concrete containing fly ash Eqn.5


(Shafigh et al., 2013a)
C

Pelletized blast furnace slag LWAC with cube


AC

Eqn.6
compressive strength ranging from 10 to 65 MPa
(Neville, 2011)
(Khan Normal weight concrete containing POFA and/or SF
with cube compressive strength ranging 25 to 115 Eqn.7
and Lynsdale, 2002) MPa
Normal weight concrete with cube compressive
Eqn.8
strength ranging 21 to 83 MPa
(Committee, 1992)

24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
3
M
4 Fig. 13. OPS concrete 28-day splitting strength; Predicted/Experimental value

5
D

6 3.6 Specific strength


TE

7 The ratio of strength to weight which is called specific strength is an influential concrete
EP

8 structure behavior (Shafigh et al., 2014a). The lower specific strength of concrete compared to

9 steel is a disadvantage of concrete. However, at the same strength, the structural LAWC proved
C

10 to have significantly higher specific strength compared to NWC. This significant asset of LAWC
AC

11 makes it so competitive with even NWC having high strength (Mahmud et al., 2013). Table 8

12 shows the 28-day compressive strength, specific strength, in addition to density for different

13 types of LWA. It can be observed from Table 8 that LAWC without mineral admixture (R0)

14 shows 27%, 37%, and 44% higher specific strength compared to expanded clay, volcanic tuff,

15 and Basaltic-pumice LAWC, respectively. Mix RF25 containing 50% CSM with the cement

25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 content of 250 kg/m^3 shows better specific strength compared to volcanic tuff and basaltic-

2 pumice LAWC without CSM with a cement content of 400 and 500 kg/m^3, respectively. It

3 should be emphasized that OPS lightweight aggregate is more sustainable as agricultural residues

4 compared to expanded clay which are manufactured materials and need energy to be produced.

PT
5 Furthermore, OPS concrete (mix R0) has 31% higher specific strength compared to NWC having

RI
6 2400 kg/m^3 dry density and 28-day strength equal to mix R0. At the same compressive

7 strength, higher OPS concrete specific strength indicates superior performance of OPS in

SC
8 comparison with normal weight concrete (Shafigh et al., 2014a).

U
9 Table 8 Specific strength of different lightweight aggregate concrete

Lightweight Aggregate 28-day Compressive Density Specific Strength


Concrete
OPS aggregate
AN
Strength (MPa) (kg/m^3) (N.m/kg)

R0 39.9 1838 21708


M
R10 37.7 1794 20988
R20 30.5 1707 17859
R30 27.2 1623 16752
RF15 33.2 1774 18738
D

RF25 28.5 1673 17049


Natural and Manufactured Lightweight Aggregate
TE

(Shafigh
Expanded clay et al., 30.8 1801 17102
2014a)
(Shannag
EP

Volcanic tuff 29.3 1850 15838


, 2011)
(Kılıç et
Basaltic-pumice 28 1860 15054
al., 2003)
10
C

11 3.7 Flexural Strength (Modulus of Rupture):


AC

12 In this study, the 28-day flexural strength measured to be between 3.1 and 4.4 MPa for OPS

13 concretes. It can be seen from Table 9 that flexural strengths decrease as the RHA content

14 increases. Flexural strength value of mixes R10, R20, R30, RF15 and RF25 concrete mixes

15 decreased by 1.4%, 29%, 31.3%, 24.5% and 29.3 % compared to control concrete (R0). The

16 results show that replacement of cement by 10% RHA almost does not have an effect on the

26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 flexural strength of OPS concrete. The addition of FA up to 25% in RHA concretes helps to

2 increase the flexural strength compared to mix R30. Yasar (Yasar et al., 2003) also reported that

3 28-days flexural strength of scoria lightweight aggregate concrete containing FA(20%) is higher

4 than scoria mixture without FA. As it can be seen from Table 9, the ratio of 28-days flexural

PT
5 strength to compressive strength is around 10-11%. Shafigh (Shafigh et al., 2013a) also reported

RI
6 that this ratio is in the range of 9-11% for high strength OPS concrete. Mahmud (Mahmud, 2010)

7 investigated that the average flexural strength to 28-day compressive strength ratio was about

SC
8 13% for normal weight concrete whereas this ratio for OPS concrete was 10%.

U
9 According to Zheng (W. Zheng and Lee, 2001), the concrete flexural strength is 35% greater

10

11
AN
than the splitting tensile strength. Based on Mahmud (Mahmud et al., 2009) finding, the ratio

between splitting tensile strength and flexural strength in OPS concrete was 60-70%. In this
M
12 study, the 28-day flexural strength of OPS concrete mixes of R0, R10, R20, R30, R15 and RF25

13 is 37%, 53%, 32%, 49%, 40% and 9% higher than its splitting tensile strength, respectively.
D

14
TE

15 Table 9 ratio of flexural strength to compressive strength and tensile strength


EP

Mix fcu fr ft fr/fcu fr/ft


R0 39.9 4.4 3.2 11.0 1.4
R10 37.7 4.34 2.8 11.5 1.5
R20 30.5 3.12 2.4 10.2 1.3
C

R30 27.2 3.02 2.0 11.1 1.5


RF15 33.2 3.32 2.4 10.0 1.4
AC

RF25 28.5 3.11 2.9 10.9 1.1


16
17

18 Fig.14 shows the relationship of OPS concrete (containing RHS and RHA-FA) 28-day cube

19 compressive strength with its flexural strength. From data analysis, the equation below has been

20 proposed for OPS concrete compressive strength of between 27 and 40 MPa:

27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3 Where fr is flexural strength (MPa)

PT
4 fcu is cube compressive strength (MPa)

RI
U SC
AN
M
D

5
6 Fig. 14. OPS concrete 28-day flexural strength vs. compressive strength
TE

8 There are several equations proposed in the literature for predicting flexural strength from
EP

9 compressive strength. Table 10 shows the equation developed by past researchers. As can be
C

10 seen in Fig.15, for OPS concrete having Compressive strength up to 35 MPa, the best equation
AC

11 was proposed by Mahmud (Mahmud et al., 2009) (Eqn. 1). However, for high strength OPS

12 concrete (with Compressive strength more than 35 MPa), the Shafigh’s (Shafigh et al., 2012)

13 (Eqn.2) equation predicts more accurate flexural strength.

14 Table 10 Proposed equation by past studies for predicting flexural strength from compressive strength

Equation Description No.

28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(Mah
mud OPS concretes with compressive strength ranging
Eqn.1
et al., from 15 to 37 MPa
2009)
(Shaf
igh et Crushed OPS concretes with cube compressive strength
Eqn.2
al., 35 to 53 MPa
2012)

PT
(Lo
Expanded clay lightweight aggregate concrete with cube compressive strength
et al., Eqn.3
ranging from 29 to 43 MPa
2004)
1

RI
2

SC
3

U
AN
M
D
TE

4
5 Fig. 15. Experimental and theoretical value for 28-day flexural strength of OPS concrete
EP

6 3.8 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

7 The ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test was conducted as a non-destructive test to detect the
C

8 presence of voids or cavities and the uniformity of concrete. The UPV of all the OPSC mixes are
AC

9 presented in Table 11. The 28 days UPV of all the water cured (FC) mixes varied from 3.66 to

10 4.09 km/s. According to Whitehurst (Whitehurst, 1986), Concretes could be classified as

11 excellent, good, doubtful, poor and very poor in terms of their UPV values of 4.5 km/s and

12 higher, 3.5–4.5, 3.0–3.5, 2.0–3.0 km/s and below 2.0 km/s, respectively (Whitehurst, 1986).

29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Table 11 Ultrasonic pulse velocity of OPS concrete at 28 days under different curing condition

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (km/s)


Mix
AD 3D 5D 7D FC
Control 3.81 3.74 3.73 3.73 4.09
R 10 3.64 3.81 3.80 3.80 3.98
R 20 3.34 3.49 3.53 3.57 3.73

PT
R 30 3.13 3.28 3.37 3.40 3.67
RF 15 3.53 3.58 3.65 3.69 3.87
RF 25 2.92 3.08 3.18 3.28 3.66

RI
2

3 OPS concrete with zero percent replacement of cement has higher ultrasonic pulse velocity

SC
4 compared to other mixes. This is rooted in the higher proportion of compressive strength and

U
5 UPV of primary hydration products (formed from cement and water reaction) than secondary

7
AN
ones (formed from the reaction between calcium hydroxide, silica, and alumina in RHA).

Therefore, an increase in the RHA content, as well as FA in the mixes, was bound to attain lower
M
8 UPV values.

9 The UPV value also can be affected by the water content of concrete; as can be seen in mix
D

10 proportions of concretes (Table 4), the w/b increased as the amount of cementitious material
TE

11 (RHA and FA) increased in the concrete mixture. By increasing w/b, the voids in the concrete
EP

12 increases as well. In the other hand, the speed of pulse propagation is less through the voids.

13 Therefore, the UPV value for concrete containing higher cementitious materials is lower.
C

14 By replacing of cement with RHA by 10% and 20% in OPS concrete, it resulted UPV values of
AC

15 3.6 – 4.1 km/s in every curing conditions and it indicates that OPS concrete could be categorized

16 as a good quality concrete. As mix R10, R20 and control mix lies within a good classification, it

17 shows that there is no large voids or cracks present in a particular concrete that negatively impact

18 the structural integrity. Table 11 shows that an increase in the replacement of RHA by cement

19 led to a decrease in UPV values at 28 days curing. The reduction in the UPV values was

30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 insignificant for the OPS concrete with RHA replacement of 10 %; a reduction of 2.7 % was

2 noticed for 10% replacement of OPC by RHA at the age of 28 days water curing.

3 The result of 30% cementitious material replacement showed that by mixing 15% RHA and

PT
4 15% FA, higher UPV value can be obtained compared to 30% replacement of RHA. Mix R30,

5 RF15, and RF25 concretes showed the UPV value of 3.66 to 3.87 km/s at 28 days continuously

RI
6 moist curing and they could be categorized as good quality concrete. Results show that curing

7 plays an important role in the quality of concrete. Mix RF25 concrete has the UPV value of 2.92

SC
8 km/s for 28 days of air drying and the UPV value of 3.66 km/s for 28 days continuously moist

U
9 curing. It is possible to conclude that the quality of concrete can be altered by water curing. Mix

10

11
AN
RF25 concrete can be categorized as poor concrete by air drying but it can be categorized as

good concrete under moist curing condition.


M
12 The most common purpose of UPV measurement is to assess concrete strength, which is usually

13 done with a calibration curve. Fig.16 shows the UPV and the compressive strength relation for
D

14 RHA-based OPS concrete and RHA with FA-based OPS concrete. A correlation was found with
TE

15 R2 = 0.85 and the following equation were proposed for the relationship:
EP

16
C

17
AC

18 Where, v is Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (km/s) and fcu is Compressive Strength (MPa)

31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
1
2 Fig. 16. Relationship between UPV and compressive strength

U
3

4
AN
Table 12 shows different equations for the relationship between compressive strength and UPV
M
5 of different LWAC which are proposed by previous studies.

6 Table 3 Compressive strength and UPV correlations for various LAWC


D

LWA Equation No.


TE

OPS (Mo et 1
al.,
2014)
Arlita (Bogas 2
et al.,
EP

2013)
Leca (Bogas 3
et al.,
2013)
C

Argex (Bogas 4
et al.,
AC

2013)
fcu is compressive strength (MPa) and v is ultrasonic pulse velocity (km/s)
7

8 3.9 Drying shrinkage

9 Another important property of concrete is drying shrinkage. Hardened concrete, when exposed to

10 the ambient temperature and humidity, will undergo drying shrinkage, thus exhibits shrinkage

32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 strain that is associated with moisture loss. It is a time-dependent process and will occur over

2 long period of time which could be deleterious when concrete is restrained (Mehta and Monteiro,

3 2006). Drying shrinkage may also contribute to stress loss in pre-stressed members and joint

4 failure. This property is not usually critical in case of LAWC being used as insulation or fill.

PT
5 Although, when it comes to structural applications drying shrinkage should be taken into

RI
6 account.

7 Cement type and its contents, w/c, hydration degree, aggregates and their elastic modulus,

SC
8 amount of admixtures and their characteristics, relative humidity and length of exposure, the

U
9 concrete mass size/shape and the distribution and amount of internal reinforcement, have great

10

11
AN
impact on drying shrinkage (Bisschop, 2002; Chandra and Berntsson, 2002). Drying shrinkage is

reported to be greater for LWAC rather than NWC and is much dependent on the properties of
M
12 LWA and the content of aggregate (Neville, 2011).

13 From Fig.17, it can be observed that drying shrinkage for all mixes increases with age, and the
D

14 control concrete mix (R0) has lower shrinkage value compared to RHA and RHA-FA concrete
TE

15 mixes.
EP

16
C
AC

33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
1
2 Fig. 17. Drying shrinkage of OPS concrete

U
3

4 AN
As shown in fig. 17 the shrinkage rate declined for the control and R10 mixes after about 40

5 days. At 100 days, the shrinkage of mix R0 and R10 mixes was about 570 micro-strains. For R20
M
6 and R30 mixes, it was about 720 and 1020 micro-strains, respectively at 100 days, which was
D

7 almost 26% and 79% above shrinkage of the reference concrete (R0). Having higher w/b could
TE

8 be the main reason of why R20 and R30 mixes show higher shrinkage than R0. Hence, it can be

9 concluded that RHA effect on drying shrinkage of OPS concrete is of great significance when
EP

10 the slump value is kept in range of 65-85 mm as control concrete (R0) and cement replacement

11 by RHA is more than 20%.


C

12 As can be observed from Fig.17, drying shrinkage of R30 concrete is about 1000 micro-strain.
AC

13 Although the compressive strength of this concrete is in an acceptable range to be used for

14 structural purposes, this concrete could not be used as a material for constructing structural

15 elements due to its high drying shrinkage value. Therefore, it is concluded that the criteria for

16 accepting a sustainable concrete to be used in structural elements should be different from the

17 conventional concrete.
34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 3.10 Carbon dioxide emission

2 OPC is mainly made of clinker which is produced by heating limestone to a temperature above

3 950 °C. The energy required for this reaction ( 3000 to 6500 MJ/ton of clinker (García-Gusano

PT
4 et al., 2015)) is achieved by fossil fuels combustion (Taylor et al., 2006). Therefore, the cement

5 industry is known to be responsible for roughly 5-8% of global CO2 emissions (Kajaste and

RI
6 Hurme, 2016) (only in 2010, 2823 million metric ton of CO2 was emitted from cement sector

7 (OECD)). One of the alternative solutions to reduce CO2 emission from cement industry is to

SC
8 replace clicker with SCMs. This study aimed to produce sustainable lightweight aggregate

U
9 concrete incorporating waste materials to replace both OPC and aggregate. The carbon dioxide

10

11
AN
analysis is presented in Table 13. The calculation of the amount of carbon dioxide emission for a

particular component of concrete was based on 1 m3 of concrete. The CO2 for OPC was taken as
M
12 0.931 t CO2/ton (Yang et al., 2015) in which on average, about 40% released from fuel

13 combustion, grinding and other processes, and 60% coming from the decomposition of calcium
D

14 carbonate (limestone) to calcium oxide (lime) and carbon dioxide (Ali et al., 2011; Purnell and
TE

15 Black, 2012). The FA was reported to have a CO2 of 0.0196 t CO2/ton, while the mining sand

16 has CO2 emission factor of 0.026 per ton (Yang et al., 2015). Whereas, the total CO2 emitted
EP

17 from RHA was calculated to be 0.175 due to the grinding process.


C

18 It was reported that after Portland cement, coarse aggregate is the next major source of CO2
AC

19 emission generated by typically commercially produced concrete mixes, being responsible for

20 13–20% of total CO2 emissions (Shafigh et al., 2013b). Hence, replacement of coarse aggregate

21 with the waste lightweight material can lead to further reduction in the overall CO2 emission.

22 The OPS utilized in this study is a final industrial by-product that could be utilized directly for

23 concrete production without any further processing stages and the crushing energy required to

35
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 crush it is significantly lower than that for gravel due to the porosity and can be easily crushed.

2 Hence, the carbon emission for crushing OPS was considered at the minimum level of zero. It

3 should be noted that it was assumed that all the concrete compound were transported for the

4 same distance (120 km) using 1.5-ton capacity diesel truck. The CO2 emission was calculated to

PT
5 be 6.3x10^-5 CO2-kg/kg.km (Yang et al., 2015).

RI
6 It can be observed that the amount of CO2 emission of the mix R0 was higher than the other OPS

7 mixes. The higher CO2 emission for the R0 mix is attributed to the higher cement content that

SC
8 has been used. With replacing OPC with 10%, 20%, and 30%. RHA, the amount of CO2 was

U
9 reduced about 8%, 15%, and 24%, respectively. A significant reduction in CO2 emission for

10 AN
binary mix RF25 (25% Fan 25% RHA) was calculated to be about 41% lesser than the reference

11 mix (R0). The results are in good agreement with previous results of using binary of FA (30%)
M
12 and RHA (20%) in self-compacting concrete (Gursel et al., 2016). Moreover, according to

13 American concrete institute (ACI) 25% FA to replacing the OPC can reduce the overall CO2
D

14 emission by 13% to 15%. In addition, the American coal ash association (ACAA) estimated that
TE

15 utilization of FA in concrete can annually reduce about 12 million ton of CO2 (Glazer et al.,

16 2011).
EP

17
C

18
AC

19 Table 13 Carbon dioxide emission for OPS concretes

Mix Content (kg/m^3) Total


Design CO2
OPS Sand Binder ( Kg/m^3)
Kg/m^3 CO2 Kg/m^3 CO2 OPC RHA FA
kg/m^3 kg/m^3
Kg/m^3 CO2 Kg/m^3 CO2 Kg/m^3 CO2 Total
kg/m^3 kg/m^3 kg/m^3 CO2
kg/m^3
R0 324 2.3328 945 9.261 500 468.6 0 0 0 0 480.194

36
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

R10 324 2.3328 945 9.261 450 421.74 50 9.11 0 0 442.444

R20 324 2.3328 945 9.261 400 374.88 100 18.22 0 0 404.694

R30 324 2.3328 945 9.261 350 328.02 150 27.33 0 0 366.944

RF15 324 2.3328 945 9.261 350 328.02 75 13.665 75 2.01 355.289

RF25 324 2.3328 945 9.261 250 234.3 125 22.775 125 3.35 272.019

PT
1

RI
U SC
AN
M
D

2
TE

3 Fig. 18. Relationship between carbon dioxide and OPS concrete containing RHA and FA

4
EP

5
C

6
AC

7 4.0 Conclusion

8 The application of oil palm shell (OPS) as coarse lightweight aggregate (LWA) in addition to

9 rice husk ash (RHA) and fly ash (FA) as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM), was

10 studied throughout this work for producing lightweight concrete (LAWC). The physical and

37
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 mechanical behavior of concretes were measured and analyzed for six samples with various

2 replacement levels of RHA and FA (binary and ternary blended cement). Based on the outcome

3 of this investigation, the following conclusion can be drawn:

PT
4 1. Replacement of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) by RHA and FA significantly reduces

5 the density of OPS concrete.

RI
6 2. The compressive strengths for OPS concretes containing RHA (binary blended cement)

7 and RHA-FA (ternary blended cement) are lower at all ages. The 28-day compressive

SC
8 strength values and the oven dry density of all OPS concretes containing RHA and RHA-

U
9 FA measured to be from 27 to 38 MPa and from 1620 to 1790 kg/m^3, respectively.

10

11
AN
3. If RHA content increases over 10% in OPS concrete, the compressive strength and

workability will be reduced due to high water demand of RHA particles. High water
M
12 demand of RHA is because of its high porosity and consequently the high surface area of

13 the particles.
D

14 4. By using FA in OPS-RHA concrete, the amount of RHA replacement could be increased


TE

15 and eventually FA will help to increase the workability owing to FA particles’ spherical

16 shape.
EP

17 5. It is possible to produce grade 30 and 25 OPS lightweight concrete by using 30% and
C

18 50% of RHA and FA with oven dry density of about 1750 kg/m^3 and 1650 kg/m^3,
AC

19 respectively.

20 6. OPS concrete incorporating RHA and FA is more sensitive to the lack of curing.

21 Although OPS concrete has a significant reduction in the compressive strength under air

22 drying condition, but initial water curing significantly improves the strength gain

23 compared to air drying.

38
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 7. All OPS concretes satisfied the requirements of ASTM: C330 for splitting tensile strength

2 for structural LAWC which is minimum of 2.0 MPa.

3 8. Replacement of cement by 10% of RHA almost did not have effect on the flexural
4 strength of OPS concrete

PT
5 9. Quality assessment of OPS concretes incorporating RHA and FA by using ultrasonic

RI
6 pulse velocity at 28 days showed that all the water cured (FC) concretes classified as

7 good concrete.

SC
8 10. The use of RHA and RHA-FA in OPS concrete increased the drying shrinkage. The

U
9 contribution of RHA more than 20% had a notable effect on the shrinkage of OPS

10 AN
concrete. This is due to higher RHA content demanded more water and increased water

11 to binder ratio of the concrete mix.


M
12 11. Mix R30 has acceptable compressive and splitting tensile strengths to be used in

13 structures. However, this concrete has very high drying shrinkage (about 1000 micro-
D

14 strain), and, therefore, it cannot be used as structural materials. It is strongly


TE

15 recommended that for concretes containing unconventional materials the other properties

16 of concrete are considered before making any decision about using these type of
EP

17 concretes in structures.
C

18 12. Substitution of OPC with 10, 20, and 30% RHA in OPS concrete reduced the CO2
AC

19 emission of about 8%, 15%, and 24%. The highest emission reduction (up to 41 %) was

20 for OPS concrete containing 25% FA and 25% RHA.

21 13. The current research regarding the OPS concrete would highly benefit from further

22 investigations in several areas. Future research should look into time-dependent

23 properties of OPS concrete containing SCMs, such as creep. In addition, the durability of

39
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 OPS concrete when FA and RHA are incorporated is also of great significance and

2 should be taken into account in future works. Moreover, shear and flexural behavior of

3 reinforced OPS concrete beam containing a high volume of SCM should be carefully

4 explored. Finally, considering the different hydration mechanism of SCMs, further

PT
5 investigations should be carried out on the effect of accelerated curing methods on OPS

RI
6 concrete, such as hot water or steam curing.

SC
8

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

40
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

REFERENCES

Abdullah, A., 1984. Basic strength properties of lightweight concrete using agricultural wastes as
aggregates, Proceedings of international conference on low-cost housing for developing

PT
countries, Roorkee, India.
Al-Gahtani, A., 2010. Effect of curing methods on the properties of plain and blended cement
concretes. Construction and Building Materials 24, 308-314.
Alengaram, U.J., Mahmud, H., Jumaat, M.Z., 2011. Enhancement and prediction of modulus of

RI
elasticity of palm kernel shell concrete. Materials & Design 32, 2143-2148.
Alengaram, U.J., Muhit, B.A.A., Jumaat, M.Z.b., 2013. Utilization of oil palm kernel shell as
lightweight aggregate in concrete – A review. Construction and Building Materials 38, 161-172.

SC
Ali, M., Saidur, R., Hossain, M., 2011. A review on emission analysis in cement industries.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15, 2252-2261.
Altwair, N.M., Kabir, S., 2010. Green concrete structures by replacing cement with pozzolanic

U
materials to reduce greenhouse gas emission for sustainable environment, Proceedings of 6th
International Engineering and Construction Conference (IECC’6), Cairo, Egypt, pp. 28-30.
AN
Aprianti, E., Shafigh, P., Bahri, S., Farahani, J.N., 2015. Supplementary cementitious materials
origin from agricultural wastes – A review. Construction and Building Materials 74, 176-187.
Atiş, C.D., Özcan, F., Kılıç, A., Karahan, O., Bilim, C., Severcan, M.H., 2005. Influence of dry
and wet curing conditions on compressive strength of silica fume concrete. Building and
M
Environment 40, 1678-1683.
Babu, D.S., Babu, K.G., Wee, T., 2005. Properties of lightweight expanded polystyrene
aggregate concretes containing fly ash. Cement and Concrete Research 35, 1218-1223.
D

Bingol, A., Gul, R., 2004. Compressive strength of lightweight aggregate concrete exposed to
high temperatures. Indian Journal of Engineering and Materials Science 11, 68-72.
TE

Bisschop, J., 2002. Drying shrinkage microcracking in cement-based materials. TU Delft, Delft
University of Technology.
Bogas, J.A., Gomes, M.G., Gomes, A., 2013. Compressive strength evaluation of structural
lightweight concrete by non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method. Ultrasonics 53, 962-
EP

972.
Bremner, T., 2001. Environmental aspects of concrete: problems and solutions, All-Russian
Conference on Concrete and Reinforced Concrete.
C

Bui, D., Hu, J., Stroeven, P., 2005. Particle size effect on the strength of rice husk ash blended
gap-graded Portland cement concrete. Cement and concrete composites 27, 357-366.
AC

Cai, B., Wang, J., He, J., Geng, Y., 2016. Evaluating CO2 emission performance in China’s
cement industry: An enterprise perspective. Applied Energy 166.
Chandra, S., Berntsson, L., 2002. Lightweight aggregate concrete. Elsevier.
Chindaprasirt, P., Rukzon, S., 2008. Strength, porosity and corrosion resistance of ternary blend
Portland cement, rice husk ash and fly ash mortar. Construction and Building Materials 22,
1601-1606.
Committee, A., Institute, A.C., Standardization, I.O.f., 2008. Building code requirements for
structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary. American Concrete Institute.
Committee, A.C.I., 1992. High-Strength Concrete (ACI 363R-92). Special Publication 228.

41
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Damtoft, J., Lukasik, J., Herfort, D., Sorrentino, D., Gartner, E., 2008. Sustainable development
and climate change initiatives. Cement and concrete research 38, 115-127.
de Sensale, G.R., 2006. Strength development of concrete with rice-husk ash. Cement and
Concrete Composites 28, 158-160.
Ganesan, K., Rajagopal, K., Thangavel, K., 2008. Rice husk ash blended cement: Assessment of
optimal level of replacement for strength and permeability properties of concrete. Construction
and Building Materials 22, 1675-1683.

PT
García-Gusano, D., Garraín, D., Herrera, I., Cabal, H., Lechón, Y., 2015. Life Cycle Assessment
of applying CO2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement production. Journal of Cleaner
Production 104, 328-338.

RI
Gesoğlu, M., Özturan, T., Güneyisi, E., 2004. Shrinkage cracking of lightweight concrete made
with cold-bonded fly ash aggregates. Cement and Concrete Research 34, 1121-1130.
Glazer, B., Graber, C., Roose, C., Syrett, P., Youssef, C., Farrah, K., 2011. Fly ash in concrete.

SC
Perkins and Will.
Gursel, A.P., Maryman, H., Ostertag, C., 2016. A life-cycle approach to environmental,
mechanical, and durability properties of “green” concrete mixes with rice husk ash. Journal of
Cleaner Production 112, 823-836.

U
Hamidian, M.R., Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Alengaram, U.J., Sulong, N.H.R., 2016. A new
sustainable composite column using an agricultural solid waste as aggregate. Journal of Cleaner
Production 129, 282-291. AN
Hoff, G.C., 2002. Guide for the use of low-density concrete in civil works projects. DTIC
Document.
Kajaste, R., Hurme, M., 2016. Cement industry greenhouse gas emissions–management options
M
and abatement cost. Journal of Cleaner Production 112, 4041-4052.
Karamloo, M., Mazloom, M., Payganeh, G., 2016. Influences of water to cement ratio on
brittleness and fracture parameters of self-compacting lightweight concrete. Engineering Fracture
D

Mechanics 168, 227-241.


Khan, M.I., Lynsdale, C.J., 2002. Strength, permeability, and carbonation of high-performance
TE

concrete. Cement and Concrete Research 32, 123-131.


Kılıç, A., Atiş, C.D., Yaşar, E., Özcan, F., 2003. High-strength lightweight concrete made with
scoria aggregate containing mineral admixtures. Cement and Concrete Research 33, 1595-1599.
EP

Lee, S.H., Sakai, E., Daimon, M., Bang, W.K., 1999. Characterization of fly ash directly
collected from electrostatic precipitator. Cement and concrete research 29, 1791-1797.
Lo, T., Cui, H., Li, Z., 2004. Influence of aggregate pre-wetting and fly ash on mechanical
properties of lightweight concrete. Waste Management 24, 333-338.
C

Mahmud, H., 2010. Comparison of mechanical and bond properties of oil palm kernel shell
concrete with normal weight concrete. International Journal of the Physical Sciences 5, 1231-
AC

1239.
Mahmud, H., Jumaat, M., Alengaram, U., 2009. Influence of sand/cement ratio on mechanical
properties of palm kernel shell concrete. J Appl Sci 9, 1764-1769.
Mahmud, H.B., Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., 2013. Development Of Green High Strength
Lightweight Concrete In Malaysia. 627-632.
Mannan, M., Ganapathy, C., 2004. Concrete from an agricultural waste-oil palm shell (OPS).
Building and environment 39, 441-448.
Manual, C., 1977. Lightweight Aggregate Concrete. CEB-FIP Manual of Design and
Technology. The Construction Press, London.

42
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Mehta, P.K., Monteiro, P.J., 2006. Concrete: microstructure, properties, and materials. McGraw-
Hill New York.
Meyer, C., 2005. Concrete as a green building material, Construction Materials Mindess
Symposium.
Mindes, S., Young, J., Concrete. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1981.
Mo, K.H., Alengaram, U.J., Jumaat, M.Z., 2014. Utilization of ground granulated blast furnace
slag as partial cement replacement in lightweight oil palm shell concrete. Materials and

PT
Structures.
Neville, A.M., 2011. Properties of concrete, 5th ed.
Neville, A.M., Brooks, J.J., 1987. Concrete technology. Longman Scientific & Technical

RI
Harlow.
OECD, OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050. OECD Publishing.
Ozer, B., Ozkul, M.H., 2004. The influence of initial water curing on the strength development

SC
of ordinary Portland and pozzolanic cement concretes. Cement and Concrete Research 34, 13-18.
Paris, J.M., Roessler, J.G., Ferraro, C.C., DeFord, H.D., Townsend, T.G., 2016. A review of
waste products utilized as supplements to Portland cement in concrete. Journal of Cleaner
Production 121, 1-18.

U
Pelisser, F., Barcelos, A., Santos, D., Peterson, M., Bernardin, A.M., 2012. Lightweight concrete
production with low Portland cement consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production 23, 68-74.
AN
Polat, R., Demirboğa, R., Karakoç, M.B., Türkmen, İ., 2010. The influence of lightweight
aggregate on the physico-mechanical properties of concrete exposed to freeze–thaw cycles. Cold
Regions Science and Technology 60, 51-56.
Purnell, P., Black, L., 2012. Embodied carbon dioxide in concrete: Variation with common mix
M
design parameters. Cement and Concrete Research 42, 874-877.
Razak, H.A., Wong, H., 2004. Re-evaluation of strength and stiffness relationships for high-
strength concrete. Asian Journal Of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing) 5, 85-99.
D

Rossignolo, J.A., Agnesini, M.V.C., Morais, J.A., 2003. Properties of high-performance LWAC
for precast structures with Brazilian lightweight aggregates. Cement and Concrete Composites
TE

25, 77-82.
Rukzon, S., Chindaprasirt, P., 2006. Strength of ternary blended cement mortar containing
Portland cement, rice husk ash and fly ash. J. Eng. Inst. Thailand 17, 38.
EP

Rukzon, S., Chindaprasirt, P., Mahachai, R., 2009. Effect of grinding on chemical and physical
properties of rice husk ash. International Journal of Minerals, Metallurgy and Materials 16, 242-
247.
Sathawane, S.H., Vairagade, V.S., Kene, K.S., 2013. Combine Effect of Rice Husk Ash and Fly
C

Ash on Concrete by 30% Cement Replacement. Procedia Engineering 51, 35-44.


Shafigh, P., Ghafari, H., Mahmud, H.B., Jumaat, M.Z., 2014a. A comparison study of the
AC

mechanical properties and drying shrinkage of oil palm shell and expanded clay lightweight
aggregate concretes. Materials & Design 60, 320-327.
Shafigh, P., Johnson Alengaram, U., Mahmud, H.B., Jumaat, M.Z., 2013a. Engineering
properties of oil palm shell lightweight concrete containing fly ash. Materials & Design 49, 613-
621.
Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Mahmud, H., 2010. Mix design and mechanical properties of oil palm
shell lightweight aggregate concrete: a review. International journal of the physical sciences 5,
2127-2134.

43
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Mahmud, H., 2011a. Oil palm shell as a lightweight aggregate for
production high strength lightweight concrete. Construction and Building Materials 25, 1848-
1853.
Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Mahmud, H.B., Alengaram, U.J., 2011b. A new method of producing
high strength oil palm shell lightweight concrete. Materials & Design 32, 4839-4843.
Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Mahmud, H.B., Alengaram, U.J., 2013b. Oil palm shell lightweight
concrete containing high volume ground granulated blast furnace slag. Construction and

PT
Building Materials 40, 231-238.
Shafigh, P., Jumaat, M.Z., Mahmud, H.B., Hamid, N.A.A., 2012. Lightweight concrete made
from crushed oil palm shell: tensile strength and effect of initial curing on compressive strength.

RI
Construction and Building Materials 27, 252-258.
Shafigh, P., Mahmud, H.B., Jumaat, M.Z.B., Ahmmad, R., Bahri, S., 2014b. Structural
lightweight aggregate concrete using two types of waste from the palm oil industry as aggregate.

SC
Journal of Cleaner Production 80, 187-196.
Shafigh, P., Nomeli, M.A., Alengaram, U.J., Mahmud, H.B., Jumaat, M.Z., 2016. Engineering
properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing limestone powder and high volume fly
ash. Journal of Cleaner Production 135, 148-157.

U
Shannag, M., 2011. Characteristics of lightweight concrete containing mineral admixtures.
Construction and Building Materials 25, 658-662.
AN
Sivakumar, G., Mohanraj, K., Barathan, S., 2009. Dielectric study on fly ash blended cement.
Journal of Chemistry 6, 231-236.
Sua-iam, G., Makul, N., 2014. Utilization of high volumes of unprocessed lignite-coal fly ash
and rice husk ash in self-consolidating concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production 78, 184-194.
M
Supino, S., Malandrino, O., Testa, M., Sica, D., 2016. Sustainability in the EU cement industry:
the Italian and German experiences. Journal of Cleaner Production 112, 430-442.
Targan, Ş., Olgun, A., Erdogan, Y., Sevinc, V., 2002. Effects of supplementary cementing
D

materials on the properties of cement and concrete. Cement and Concrete Research 32, 1551-
1558.
TE

Taylor, M., Tam, C., Gielen, D., 2006. Energy Efficiency and CO2 Emissions from the Global
Cement Industry, Energy Efficiency and CO2 Emission Reduction Potentials and Policies in the
Cement Industry,, Paris.
EP

TEO, D.C.L., MANNAN, M.A., KURIAN, V.J., 2006. Structural concrete using oil palm shell
(OPS) as lightweight aggregate. Turkish Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 30,
251-257.
Teo, D.C.L., Mannan, M.A., Kurian, V.J., 2009. Durability of lightweight OPS concrete under
C

different curing conditions. Materials and Structures 43, 1-13.


Topçu, İ.B., 1997. Semi lightweight concretes produced by volcanic slags. Cement and Concrete
AC

Research 27, 15-21.


Türkmen, İ., 2003. Influence of different curing conditions on the physical and mechanical
properties of concretes with admixtures of silica fume and blast furnace slag. Materials Letters
57, 4560-4569.
Van, V.-T.-A., Rößler, C., Bui, D.-D., Ludwig, H.-M., 2013. Mesoporous structure and
pozzolanic reactivity of rice husk ash in cementitious system. Construction and Building
Materials 43, 208-216.
W. Zheng, A.K.H.K., Lee, P.K.K., 2001. Direct Tension Test of Concrete. Materials Journal 98.

44
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Weber, S., Reinhardt, H.W., 1997. Improved Durability of High-Strength Concrete Due to
Autogenous Curing. Special Publication 170.
Whitehurst, E.A., 1986. Evaluation of concrete properties from sonic tests. ACI Monograph 2,
73.
Yang, K.-H., Jung, Y.-B., Cho, M.-S., Tae, S.-H., 2015. Effect of supplementary cementitious
materials on reduction of CO 2 emissions from concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production 103,
774-783.

PT
Yasar, E., Atis, C.D., Kilic, A., Gulsen, H., 2003. Strength properties of lightweight concrete
made with basaltic pumice and fly ash. Materials Letters 57, 2267-2270.
Zain, M., Mahmud, H., Ilham, A., Faizal, M., 2002. Prediction of splitting tensile strength of

RI
high-performance concrete. Cement and concrete research 32, 1251-1258.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

45

Вам также может понравиться