Download to read offline
![1. Introduction
Globally, management of solid wastes poses a herculean chal-
lenge to developed and developing countries owing to industrial
growth, construction booms, rapid urbanization, and consumeric
lifestyle [1]. The demand for green concrete in construction indus-
try is spurred by increased regulations to reduce carbon footprint,
limit greenhouse gas emission and limited landfill spaces. In addi-
tion, the construction industry is embracing green construction
owing to project requirements for LEED (Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design) certifications.
The present high demand for natural resources to meet infras-
tructural demands has created immense opportunities for the
use of waste materials to green infrastructure construction [2–5].
These waste materials play the roles of either supplementary
cementitious materials (SCM) or alternative aggregates (AA) in
green concrete and can be categorized as agricultural, industrial
and municipal wastes as shown in Fig. 1.
Though coined in Denmark in 1999, green concrete has been in
practical existence for several decades and centuries. Jin and Chen
[6] defined green concrete as concrete produced by utilizing alter-
native or recycled waste materials in order to reduce energy con-
sumption, environmental impact and natural resource
consumption. Green concrete is a concept of embracing and inte-
grating environmental considerations in concrete with respect to
raw material sourcing, mix design, structural design, construction
and maintenance of concrete structures [7].
The inherent drawbacks of traditional concrete include unsus-
tainable consumption of natural raw materials, low, early-age
compressive strength, environmental contamination [8–10].
On the other hand, green concrete exhibit numerous
advantages such as improvement in concrete properties, low
carbon footprint, conservation of natural resources, to mention a
few [11].
The major barriers for green concrete utilization in construction
are systemic lock-in, lower qualities of locally available materials,
increase in construction costs, and technical barriers [6,12].
In order to produce sustainable green concrete, technological
advances that are energy efficient, utilize low-carbon production
methods and novel cement formulations are required alongside
technical guidelines for their production and usage [13].
2. Common waste materials used as SCM in green concrete
The waste materials utilized in green concrete can be grouped
into three categories namely agricultural, industrial and municipal
wastes as depicted in Fig. 1. In order to utilize their pozzolanic
properties in green concrete, the waste materials are often acti-
vated through physical or chemical means or their combination
[14,15].
2.1. RHA as SCM in green concrete
Various studies have been carried out on the utilization of rice
husk ash (RHA) as supplementary cementitious material and sand
replacement in various concrete applications [14,16–20].
Utilization of RHA offers numerous benefits in concrete. A few
of the benefits include improvement of microstructure, void struc-
ture reformation, increased early age strength, by reducing the
width of the ITZ between paste and aggregate [21–23].
It was observed that the optimum parameters recommended
for RHA to maximize its pozzolanic properties in concrete varied
amongst different researches mainly because of the different con-
stituents utilized in combination with RHA, variation in the pro-
duction process and applications.
Despite many researches on RHA as SCM in concrete and mor-
tar, the relationship between the particle size and pozzolanic prop-
erties of RHA is not yet well understood. Previous researchers have
made attempt to explain their relationship with various degrees of
success. A positive relationship exist between Blaine specific sur-
face area (SSA) of RHA and its pozzolanicity but an inverse relation-
ship with median particle size ðd50Þ [24]. On the other hand, the
multilayered, angular and microporous surface of RHA was
reported to be the major factor controlling the pozzolanic reaction
[25].
In-depth literature studies revealed that the pozzolanic proper-
ties of RHA are influenced by its particle size and specific surface
area, percentage replacement of cement, and water-cement ratio.
In addition, it was observed that the influence of SSA of RHA often
supersedes that of particle size ðd50Þ. This finding was corroborated
in earlier studies [25–27]. Givi et al. [26] reported that 5 lm RHA
particle size with SSA of 36:47 m2
=g recorded the higher compres-
sive strength (CS) compared to 95 lm RHA particle size with SSA of
24 m2
=g. In a similar vein, the highest CS28 (51.8 MPa) was
obtained with the smallest RHA particle (11.5 lm) and the highest
SSA (30.4) by another researcher [25]. These values were higher
compared to the other samples with corresponding particle sizes
of 31.3 and 18.3 lm, BET SSA of 27.4 and 29.1 and corresponding
CS28 of 48.4 and 50.2 MPa respectively. The above results lend cre-
dence to the dominance and importance of SSA to both RHA poz-
zolanicity and compressive strength development of concrete.
Previous work by Cyr et al. [28]established that SCMs exhibit
both pozzolanic and physical effects, which can be quantified.
The pozzolanic contribution of SCM was reported in Eq. (1):
Dfpz ¼
apz
1 þ b
Seff
c ð1Þ
where Dfpz = pozzolanic contribution of SCM (RHA); apz = depth in
time of hydration; b = BET surface area of cement (Type 1 OPC),
which varies with water-cement ratio as shown in Fig. 2;
Seff = Effective surface area of SCM as shown in Eq. (2); c = 1.
Seff ¼ SsxgP ð2Þ
where Ss = SSA of RHA; gP = efficiency factor obtained from the
work of Cyr et al. [29]. Likewise, it was also reported that amor-
phous silica content of RHA can also be used to reliably assess the
pozzolanic potential of different RHA samples using Eq. (3) [27].
SiO2ÀEff ¼
Min ðp; pmaxÞ Á SiO2ÀAmorphous
1 À Minðp; pmaxÞ
ð3Þ
where SiO2ÀEff = effective amorphous silica content (%);SiO2ÀAmorphous
= amorphous silica content of RHA samples; p = % RHA replacement
of cement, which could reach up to maximum ðPmaxÞ. SiO2ÀEff is the
amount of amorphous SiO2 that is able to react, given the replace-
ment level p, maximum replacement level pmax and amorphous sil-
Agricultur
al wastes
Rice
husk
ash
Corn
cob
ash
Sawd
ust
ash
Industrial
wastes
Fly
ash
Silica
fume
Granula
ted
blast
furnace
slag
Municipal
wastes
Glass PlasƟcs Paper
Fig. 1. Categories of Wastes utilized in Green Concrete.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1065](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-4-320.jpg)
![ica content. The SiO2ÀEff result obtained was utilized in place Seff in
equation for comparison purposes.
Experimental data presented by Zunino and Lopez [27] were
used for analyses because they utilized RHA from different suppli-
ers with different d50, BET SSA and SiO2 amorphous content.
Although the experiment was conducted at 20% RHA replacement
of cement and 0.5 w/c ratio, it was extended to higher replacement
ratios using the formulas given above. Our results revealed that the
pozzolanic contribution of RHA varies with median particle size,
water-cement ratio, specific surface area and percentage RHA
replacement of cement as shown in Figs. 3–6.
In addition, the highest pozzolanic contribution occurred at
0.35 water-cement ratio, 30% cement replacement and
14.467 lm. This correspond with the maximum results obtained
by another study [30]. Furthermore, it was also observed that the
pozzolanic contribution increased with increasing BET SSA and
increasing reduction in median particle sizes. Therefore, in order
to enhance the pozzolanic contribution of RHA in concrete, RHA
particles with both smaller specific surface area and smaller parti-
cle sizes should be utilized to give maximum pozzolanic contribu-
tion. This implies smaller RHA particle sizes have the potential to
offer more pozzolanic contribution in concrete provided they have
higher SSA.
Furthermore, the potentials of RHA in concrete is yet to be fully
realized since most reported experiments in literature were con-
ducted at sub-optimal experimental conditions. Therefore, more
researches are needed to find cost-effective and affordable meth-
ods to improve the SSA of locally available RHA to encourage its
adoption and widespread utilization.
From Fig. 7, it was observed that the pozzolanic contribution
obtained using SiO2ÀEff proposed by Zunino and Lopez [27] gave
higher effective surface values at all median particle sizes com-
pared to the method using the SSAEff suggested by Cyr et al. [29].
Even though the two approaches showed similar trend up to med-
ian particle size of 20.644 lm, their results differed afterwards.
Calculation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA in concrete using
the SiO2ÀEff could be a better approach. This is also supported by
the fact that SiO2 constitutes about 80–90% of RHA by mass and
it is the major source of its pozzolanicity [26,30–32].
Therefore, in order to optimize the pozzolanic potentials of
RHA, proper attention must be paid to its production process as
well as its chemical composition alongside other concrete/cement
constituent materials utilized in RHAC [23,33].
Optimum grinding time for RHA depends on the incineration/
burning temperature it was subjected to, burning duration, type
of incineration equipment utilized, level of pre-treatment of the
RHA, the speed and type of grinding machine utilized.
The optimum cement replacement with RHA is governed by the
SSA of the RHA, RHA particle size, w/c ratio, presence of other SCM,
w=cm ratio, type, chemical and mineralogical composition of
cement and SCM utilized [21,34,35]. Other parameters that may
affect optimum cement replacement include type and dosage of
super plasticizer and target engineering properties to be opti-
mized, size of the concrete aggregates, porosity of the concrete
and pre-treatment and activation level of RHA.
Jamil et al. [35] reported that optimum replacement percentage
ratio of RHA in each type of cement varies as the % of C3S (trical-
cium silicate) and C2S (dicalcium silicate) varies with cement types
and the amount of CaðOHÞ2 produced during cement hydration.
The authors also mentioned that optimum replacement percentage
ratio of RHA will increase with increase in percentage of foreign
compounds in RH samples and also percentage of non-reactive
crystalline silica in RHA. In addition, the authors reported that par-
ticle size, SSA, pozzolanic reactivity and pore structure are the
main factors governing cement hydration and invariably cement
replacements in concrete. The ash type, grinding time and cement
percentage replacements effects and their interactions were also
reported to affect strength development of RHAC [36]. The authors
recommended Type 2 ash prepared at 650 °C, grinding time of
240 min and 20% or 40% cement replacement with RHA.
Negative impacts of RHA in concrete include reduction of flowa-
bility, high water requirement, flow blockage and increase in
superplasticizer requirements. Others include reduction of
strength at high RHA content, poor chloride permeability at high
RHA content and ASR reaction in alkaline solution. These negative
impacts can be ameliorated through careful optimization of the
production processes of RHA and RHAC and utilization of appropri-
ate optimum RHA contents for concrete applications.
2.2. Silica fume as SCM in green concrete
Silica fume (SF) has been used in various applications [37–44]
and acted as SCM, filler and healing agents. Benefits offered by SF
in concrete are improved flexural and compressive strengths,
increased pozzolanic activity, multi-range macroporosity proper-
ties, to mention a few [41,43–46]. Its multi-range macroporosity
properties allow its usage in the production of high-porosity
cement foams and multi-strength lightweight concrete (LWC). SF
was also found useful in increasing ultimate-load carrying capac-
ity, improved durability and impact resistance [37–40,47]. Opti-
mum dosage of SF ranges between 10 and 14% when used in
combination with materials such as steel fibres, nano-silica, recy-
cled aggregate [37,39,40].
One of the negative impacts of SF in concrete include reduction
in workability [48]. Also, SF was reported ineffective in reducing
creep [49] and caused reduction in long-term compressive
strength [50]. Increase in chloride-initiated reinforcement corro-
sion in marine environment was also reported and was found to
be mitigated at low w=c ratio [51].
2.3. Fly ash as SCM in green concrete
Previous studies have investigated the use of fly ash as SCM in
various concrete applications [52–58]. The benefits derived from
the use of fly ash were increase in compressive strength (CS), bulk
density and linear shrinkage, porosity reduction, improvement in
bending toughness and ductility [52,53,58].
In order to ensure satisfactory properties, curing time, curing
temperature and type of materials used in fly-ash concrete (FAC)
must be carefully selected [55,56]. Optimum production conditions
should also be utilized depending on exposure conditions of the
y = 21.86x + 35.46
R² = 0.974
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0.35 0.4 0.5 0.57 0.7
BETSSA(m2/g)
w/c raƟo
Fig. 2. Variation of BET SSA of cement with w/c ratio [28].
1066 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-5-320.jpg)
![envisaged FAC product [54,55,59,60]. The fly ash could be from
anthracite or bituminous coal, lignite or sub-bituminous coals [61].
Negative impacts of fly ash in high-volume fly ash concrete
(HVFAC) include extended setting times, slow strength develop-
ment, low early-age strength, construction delay, difficulties to
use in cold weather concreting and low resistance to deicer-salt
scaling carbonation [62]. Kurad et al. [63] also advised against high
volume applications of RHA in concrete to avoid retardation of
compressive strength development. In addition, high class C fly
ash can increase ASR in silica fume concrete (SFC) [64].
2.4. GGBFS as SCM in green concrete
Ground granulated blast furnace slag has been investigated for
use in production of geopolymer concrete (GPC) and alkali-
activated slag (AAS) cements [65,66]. The benefits of SF in concrete
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953
PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa)
RHA median parƟcle size, D50 (μm)
0.35 w/c
0.4 w/c
0.5 w/c
0.57 w/c
0.7 w/c
Fig. 3. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with Particle size and water-cement ratio.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953
PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa)
RHA ParƟcle Size, D50 (μm)
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Fig. 4. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with particle size at different percentage replacements.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
23.582 31.284 52.114 114.523 128.85
PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa)
BET SSA (m2/g)
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Fig. 5. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with BET SSA and percentage replacement.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1067](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-6-320.jpg)
![are improvement in durability, enhancement of long-term CS to
mention a few [67,68].
Optimum OPC=GGBFS ratio of 4:1 at 0.3 water-binder ðw=bÞ
ratio and cement-sand ratio of 1:1.5 were recommended by Chi-
diac and Panesar [69,66]. Low percentage replacements and low
water-to-powder ratios were recommended to avoid bleeding,
shrinkage straining and obtain high CS [70,71].
GGBFS and fly ash were reported to initiate corrosion and
increase critical corrosion. On the contrary, laboratory evidence
and field practice have shown their usefulness in the achievement
of durable structures even in most aggressive natural environ-
ments [72,73]. In addition, it was reported that there is no need
for extra steel protection when these SCMs are utilized in concrete
[74]. However, it was pointed out that their combination should be
avoided and appropriate precautions in concrete technology
should be taken in their concrete applications as well.
2.5. Waste glass as SCM in green concrete
Waste glass has been utilized as SCM and fine aggregates in var-
ious applications such as ultra-lightweight fibre reinforced con-
crete, fired-clay bricks to mention a few [75–79]. Other
applications include glass-reinforced panels, structural repair con-
crete and fast-cured polymer concrete [80–83].
The benefits of the utilization of WG were improved CS, resis-
tance to freezing and thawing, chloride penetration and surface
scaling, good resistance to Na2CO3 and H2SO4 [84,85]. The recom-
mended optimum percentage as cement and fine aggregate
replacements were 5–10% and 7.5–25% respectively [80,86,87].
Negative impacts of waste glass in concrete include slump
reduction at high waste glass content as well as decrease in com-
pressive strength [88]. These impacts can be ameliorated by val-
orization of waste glass to become glass fume, usage of
appropriate w/c ratio and waste glass content.
3. Activation techniques
Activation is necessary to prevent slow and low, early-age
strength development and accelerate the pozzolanic reactivity of
SCMs in green concrete. Activation helps to achieve higher early
and later strength amongst other benefits [89]. Types of activation
techniques available in literature include mechanical activation,
chemical activation, curing/temperature activation, water-
controlled activation and SCM-controlled activation.
Mechanical activation involves grinding of SCM to smaller fine
particles to increase fineness and their effective specific surface
area. Chemical activation is the addition or utilization of chemical
substances to activate the pozzolanicity of cementitious materials
[90]. Curing/temperature activation refers to the use of curing
medium with age and temperature to achieve property develop-
ment of the concrete. The curing medium could be air, water, alter-
nating combination of both.
Temperature activation refers to the use of elevated tempera-
tures above room temperature to activate the reactivity of the con-
crete constituents. Commonly utilized activation media utilized in
temperature-controlled activation are air or water. SCM-controlled
activation involves the use of SCM or cement to accelerate poz-
zolanic reactions of the pozzolans. Elevated temperature curing
at 50 °C favours pozzolanic behaviour of glass particles which also
depends on the glass composition [91]. Particle size smaller than
25 lm was recommended.
Chemical activation is the most efficient and feasible activation
method [92]. Examples of chemical activators found in literature
utilized in green concrete are sodium sulphate anhydrite, sodium
silicate, acids such as HCl and H2SO4, CaCl2, Na2SO4, NaOH,
Na2CO3, CaðOHÞ2, K2SO4, TiO2, Calcium formate. The chemical acti-
vators could be added during grinding or combined with
temperature-controlled activation to reduce total materials costs
[92]. For instance, combination of grinding and addition of
Na2SO4 achieved higher strength than single activation [93].
Advantages of chemical activation include reduction of setting
time, early strength development, reduction of total material costs,
higher SiO2 content, lower alkali and unburned carbon contents,
better grindability and smaller particle size, achievement of
superior strength and enhancement of microstructural properties
[94–97]. Sometimes, chemical activation is combined with
temperature-controlled activation.
Other benefits of chemical activation include improved worka-
bility, reduced shrinkage and prevents deterioration of later-age
strength, improved pore structure, accelerated hydration and
improved flexural strength of self-compacting concrete, reduction
of pore size and total porosity [98,99]. Kawashima et al. [100]
reported that addition of nano-CaCO3 prepared through sonication
improved hydration rate, setting time and CS of self-consolidating
concrete. Achieved reduction in initial and final setting times as
well as improvement in CS through the use of colloidal nanosilica.
In another study, quicklime was recommended for High-volume fly
ash systems only, with positive contribution to both early and
later-age strength development [101]. Addition of quicklime
increased both early and later-strength of FA-based cementitious
sytems [102]. For WGC, lithium compounds were suggested to
limit ASR expansion [103].
SCM-controlled activation has been used to improve bond
strength, reduce the setting time, achieve early-age and high late
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa)
RHA content (%)
14.467 μm
19.123 μm
19.623 μm
20.644 μm
20.953μm
Fig. 6. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with percentage replacement
using different particle sizes.
0
5
10
15
20
25
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953
EffecƟvesurfacearea(m2/g)
RHA median parƟcle size, d50 (μm)
SiO2-eff
SSAeff
Fig. 7. Comparison of pozzolanic contribution using SiO2-Eff and SSAEff..
1068 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-7-320.jpg)
![strength and reduce [104–108]. Commonly utilized SCMs include
OPC, nano-SiO2, GGBFS. Bernal et al. [109] advocate silicate-based
activators produced from SF or RHA in combination with aqueous
NaOH as an alternative to commercial-based activators. The
mechanical performance of the binders produced were similar to
those of commercial silicate solutions.
In order to achieve synergistic benefits, sometimes thermal and
mechanical activation are combined. The benefits of such method
include early-strength development, removal of inconsistencies
in the chemical and mineralogical properties of RHA [15,90].
According to Kumar et al. [110], the effects of mechanical acti-
vation depend on the type of activation device utilized. Their study
revealed that raw fly ash exhibited highest lime reactivity, fol-
lowed by vibratory mill fly ash, and then attrition mill fly ash.
Blanco et al. [111] suggested mechanical activation prior to chem-
ical activation to increase SSA and pozzolanic reactivity of SCM.
The type of activator used influences the microstructure of the
mortar or concrete and the resulting secondary products formed
[112]. Based on their results, in terms of CS, the order of preference
of alkali activator was NaOH + WG NaOH Na2CO3. They also
observed that, in fly-ash binders, the ratio of SiO2=Na2O and their
pH seems to play crucial roles in the reactivity of the cementitious
system and strength development of the binder. This finding was
corroborated by De Vargas et al. [113] who reported that
SiO2=Na2O played a major role in CS development, morphology
and microstructure of FA-based geopolymer system. Their results
revealed an increase in CS with increasing molar ratio, increasing
curing age and increasing curing temperature.
For SCM-controlled activation, addition of 5% SF to replace slag
improved CS up to 800 °C in AAS pastes [114]. Owing to its dilution
effect and pozzolanic reactivity, addition of 5–10% RHA to replace
cement was useful in the consumption of free lime, formation of
additional C-S-H resulting in increased CS [115]. In another study,
RHA addition in SF UHPC resulted in improved impermeability and
increased CS of 9.76%, 14.5% and 10.02% at 3, 28 and 120 days
[116]. Addition of nanosilica (NS) enhanced the structural perfor-
mance of FA-based GPC through the geopolymerization transfor-
mation of the amorphous phase of GPC to crystalline phase
without the need for thermal activation.
4. Production of green concrete
Production methods of green concrete differ depending on the
constituent materials to be utilized and the intended application.
In order to produce sustainable, green concrete with sufficient
workability, Müller et al. [117] suggested four basic steps namely:
I. Determining experimentally the relevant properties of the
selected concrete constituents
II. Determine the water/cement ratio based on desired cement
content and strength requirements
III. Optimize the grain size distribution of granular constituent
IV. Production and evaluation of the fresh concrete properties
based on achieved packing density and prediction compres-
sive strength
Optimization methods which can be applied in green concrete
include particle packing optimization using granular optimization
of all concrete constituent [117,118], statistical optimization using
microanalysis data and estimation of C-S-H contents [119], step-
by-step optimization method [120,121].
Other optimization methods include micro-proportioning opti-
mization of fines grading [122], particle size distribution method
[123], multi-objective simultaneous optimization using response
surface methodology (RSM) [124], box-behnken response surface
technique [125], response surface methodology using design-
expert software [126] and multicriteria optimization method for
the technical, economic and environmental aspects of green con-
crete [127].
The advantages of optimization in green concrete include min-
imization of air voids leading to attainment of maximum strength,
synergistic maximization of the properties of the constituent mate-
rials. In addition, for ternary blended cement concrete, Binici et al.
[128] suggested separately grinding each of the SCM constituents
to obtain higher compressive strengths.
5. Properties of green concrete
5.1. Fresh properties
5.1.1. Slump and water requirement
Slump test indicates the behavior of compacted concrete cone
under the action of gravitational force, which can also be seen as
a measure of the consistency or wetness of the concrete mix [129].
In order to produce HVFAC, Bentz et al. [130] recommended
optimum mixture proportioning and careful selection, evaluation
and combination of HRWRA (high-range water-reducing admix-
tures) alongside increasing aggregate volume fraction. Alaka and
Oyedele [131] obtained good workable HVFAC at low water-
binder ratio with superabundant dosage of superplasticizer (SP).
Yijin et al. [132] and Mukherjee et al. [133] recorded increase in
slump values with increasing fly ash replacements of cement,
which was attributed to high specific surface area and low specific
gravity of fly ash compared to Portland cement.
For rice husk ash (RHA), Keertana and Gobhiga [134] reported
decrease in slump with increasing RHA while Abalaka [135]
recorded increased slump up to 5% cement replacement with
RHA and decrease thereafter. For SF, Hunchate et al. [136] recorded
increasing slump up to 10% silica fume (SF) cement replacements
and decline thereafter while Amarkhail [137] obtained reduction
in slump values with up to 15% SF replacement of cement. With
respect to GGBFS, Karri et al. [138] and Arivalagan [139] reported
increase in slump values with increase in GGBFS contents. Tamila-
rasan et al. [129] reported optimum slump value of 55% GGBFS
replacement levels for grade 20 and grade 25 concretes. The
decrease in slump values was attributed to the high water absorp-
tion of RHA and often SP is added to enhance workability of RHA in
concrete.
Slump reduction is attributed to the high specific surface area of
the RHA and SF and high water absorption capacity as a result of
their macro-mesoporous nature and the concrete pore volume
[140]. Their slump reduction potential depends on their level of
reactivity and activation, level of fineness and water-cement ratio
and cement replacement ratio [140,141]. Abalaka [135] also men-
tioned that each SCM has its own optimum w=b ratio which would
give it its maximum reactivity. In addition, RHA had higher yield
stress and viscosity than SF and its particle shape is angular while
that of SF is spherical [140]. As a result, in their study, RHA exhib-
ited lower mini-slump flow compared to compared to SF. In
another study, SF exhibited higher flow compared to unground
RHA and was attributed to its spherical particle shape, its ability
to release adsorbed water from its microstructure and the amount
of fine particles it contains [142].
For waste glass, while Malik et al. [143] and Liang et al. [144]
reported increasing slump values at increasing waste glass replace-
ments of fine aggregate, Abdallah and Fan [145] reported decline in
slump values. The contrasting views may be due to the different
concrete mix ratios used, the physical properties of the concrete
constituents and the replacement levels investigated.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1069](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-8-320.jpg)
![5.1.2. Setting time, flow, workability, segregation index, bleeding
Setting time determines the time available for transport, plac-
ing and compaction of cement/cementitious-based materials
[146]. The authors reported that the setting time of GGBFS-based
geopolymers vary with the calcium content, particle size and
Si=Al molar ratios. The initial setting time (IST) and final setting
time (FST) they obtained were 109–141 min and 155–327 min.
Bouzoubaa and Lachemi [147] reported that for FA-based SCC ini-
tial and final setting times ranged from 4:50–7:45 to 6:30–10:15 h
and were found to be 3–4 h longer than control. Brooks et al. [148]
reported that there is no linear relationship between setting times
and SCM percentage replacement owing to the influence of several
factors. In terms of difference between FST and IST, SF results were
found comparable to OPC and preferable to FA and GGBS.
Ravina and Mehta [149] reported delay in IST and FST from
20 min to 4 h 20 min and 1 h – 5 h 15 min in concrete depending
on the type and amount of FA utilized. The delay in setting time
was influenced by the sulphate and available alkali contents of
FA. Nochaiya et al. [150] reported IST and FST values of 145–
170 min and 215–235 min for Portland-FA cement pastes respec-
tively. Inclusion of SF increased the IST but led to reduction of
the FST at increasing SF contents from 5 to 10%.
Ikpong and Okpala [141] reported improvement in cohesive-
ness and flowability of RHA-modified concrete containing 30%
RHA replacement of cement. The IST increased from 2 h to 3.5 h
while the FST increased from 4 h to 4.5 h respectively. Lin et al.
[151] reported that WG recorded IST and FST values of 666–
1158 min and 765–1245 for increasing replacements of MK from
10 to 40%. Likewise, Wang [152] observed reduction in IST and
FST with increasing WG powder content of up to 50% cement
replacement in mortar at 0:485 w=b ratio. Combination of coarse
and fine WG resulted in longer IST and FST as well as higher slump
values. WG was recommended because of its impermeability,
enhanced flow properties and higher strength at elevated
temperatures.
Also, Bouzoubaa and Lachemi [147] reported that FA-based SCC
exhibit good deformability and stability. Increase in flow time was
observed with decrease in water content. Segregation index was
found to decrease with increasing FA content but increased with
SP dosage. A w=cm ratio of 0.45 was recommended to obtain
segregation-resistant FA-SCC. Shen [153] reported that smaller
aggregate size, continuous aggregate gradation, lower aggregate
density and higher paste viscosity and yield stress reduce dynamic
segregation.
According to Xie et al. [154], Fresh SCC made with UPFA (ultra-
pulverized fly ash) must meet the following requirements: 240–
270 mm slump, slump flow of 600–750 and L-box flow velocity
(VL) of 35–80 m/s. When the VL is 80 m=s, the viscosity is too
high to resist segregation and when it is 35 m/s, the viscosity is
too high to attain self-compacting. In order to produce HSSCC with
UPFA, the following were recommended: fineness of 500–
600 m2
=kg, UPFA content of 30–40%, total SCM content
P 500 kg=m3
, minimum sand ratio of 40% and appropriate water
content at optimum SP content. In addition, a low yield stress,
moderate viscosity and retention of kinetic energy of the flowable
mix by reducing the coarse aggregate fraction is essential to
achieve required fluidity, segregation resistance and prevent inter-
particle collision and blocking.
Rahman et al. [155] reported that RHA produced from uncon-
trolled burning can be utilized in low-cost housing construction
project. The RHA concrete up to 40% exhibited sieve segregation
of 0.04–8.2%, slump flow of 580–670 mm, passing abilities of
5.9–7 s (v-funnel) and 3.5–5.2 which met the requirements of
SCC. Wu et al. [156] reported utilization of fly ash as viscous mod-
ifier in production of self-compacting LWC with good workability.
The concrete exhibited segregation ratio (SR) of 4.4–5.6% and
aggregate segregation index (Iseg) of 2.9–4.2%, both of which are
15% specified for SCC.
In addition, Yazıcı [157] obtained lower slump flow at 30% and
40% cement replacements compared to SF, higher slump flow at
50% cement replacement and equal slump flow at 60% cement
replacement. The slump flow values for FA and SF vary from
750–800 mm to 765–825 mm respectively.
Bingöl and Tohumcu [158] showed that FA achieved better fill-
ing and passing ability in self-compacting concrete (SCC) compared
to SF. Based on their slump flow values, FA-based SCC could be
used for normal applications such as walls and columns while
the SF-based SCC can be utilized in slightly-reinforced concrete
structures. Ternary and quaternary SCMs were also found to
improve the filling and passing ability of self-compacting concrete
and met all the EFNARC requirements [159].
Workability is the ease of handling, placing, compacting and
finishing fresh concrete [104]. The authors demonstrated that
workability of GPC reduced with inclusion of GGBFS and FA and
reduction of activator to binder owing to accelerated reaction of
calcium and angular and spherical shapes of GGBFS and FA parti-
cles. Duval and Kadri [160] recommended 10% SF as the maximum
replacement for cement without affecting workability of SFC.
Msinjili et al. [161] reported that workability of fresh concrete
can be improved with the aid of polycarboxylate ethers and ligno-
sulphonate while Karthik et al. [162] recommended the use of bio-
additives. Improved workability and prolonged setting time were
observed in their applications. Ismail and Waliuddin [163]
reported good workability of concrete with finely ground 20%
RHA replacement of cement and hard workability at 30% RHA.
On the other hand, Khatri et al. [48] reported that SF marginally
decreased workability of concrete but contributed significantly to
improved mechanical properties.
The properties of fresh cement pastes and concrete is affected
by hot weather conditions [164]. Likewise, IST and FST decreases
with curing temperature increase. Ujhelyi and Ibrahim [165] men-
tioned that the use of 40% GGBS along with ground tuff (a natural
pozzolana) up to 20% was useful in preserving the properties of
concrete during hot-weather concreting conditions.
For WGC, slump flow, flow ratio and v-funnel increased with
increasing WG content [166]. Slump flow values of 670–880 mm,
670–740 mm, and 670–780 were obtained at increasing cement
contents of 350 kg=m3
, 400 kg=m3
and 450 kg=m3
.
Vinai et al. [167] recommended water-solid ratio range of 0.37–
0.41 and binder content 400 kg=m3
to avoid fast initial concrete
setting and significant strength reduction. Boukendakdji et al.
[168] recommended polycarboxylate-based SP to improve worka-
bility of SCC at optimum GGBFS content of 15%. The authors
advised that care should be taken in the use of mineral additives
owing to their tendency to reduce early strength when used as
cement replacement.
Bleeding is the movement of water to the surface of freshly
placed concrete and is noticeable when surface water exists on
fresh concrete surface [169]. The negative effects of bleeding
include variable concrete properties. According to Wainwright
and Ait-Aider [170], bleeding is influenced largely by the particle
size distribution of cement, fine content in concrete mix as well
as cement reactivity. The authors reported similar bleeding
between combination of 40% GGBS + 60% OPC and 100% OPC.
5.2. Hard properties
5.2.1. Compressive strength
In order to enhance easy comparison, the compressive strength
(CS) results obtained by different researchers for different green
1070 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-9-320.jpg)
![concrete were plotted in Fig. 8 while the materials used were given
in Table 1. The three highest CS of 92.1 MPa, 80 MPa and 79 MPa
were achieved using SF + ns, SF only and RHA after 90 curing days
[39,171]. SF was corroborated by Benaicha et al. [172] to produce
high CS of 82.9 MPa after 28 days curing age.
Addition of lime to HVFAC and cement to GPC (geopolymer con-
crete) were shown to aid their CS development [59]. Low CS were
recorded with geopolymers produced with alkali activators which
was attributed to their high Si=Al ratio [17,173]. Hwang and Huynh
[17] noted that the development of compressive strength depends
on appropriate combination of NaOH concentration and RHA
content.
Kumar and Gupta [174] recorded CS of 0.2 MPa with Ca/Si ratio
of 0.106, Shatat [175] reported CS of 63.7 MPa at Ca=Si ratio of 0.89
while Chindaprasirt et al. [173] recorded 38 MPa with Ca=Si ratio
of 7.98 and 0.026 before and after geopolymerisation. Thus, it can
be inferred that high CS is obtained at intermediate Ca=Si between
0.85 and 1.0. Therefore, it is suggested that chemically complimen-
tary waste materials should be utilized in blended concrete appli-
cations to achieve optimum results.
5.2.2. Flexural strength
Flexural strength results obtained by various researchers for
green concrete differs as depicted in Fig. 9 while the materials were
shown in Table 2. The highest flexural strength of 10:97 N=mm2
was obtained by Mohseni et al. [176] with quarternary system of
Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPO, followed by Patil and Sangle [177]
who utilized Cement + 20% FA + 1.5% Steel fibres + water reducing
admixture and then Sathawane et al. [178] who used ternary sys-
tem of Cement + Fly ash + RHA. The lowest flexural strength was
recorded by Walczak et al. [179] with waste glass.
Differences in their flexural strengths can be attributed to dif-
ferences in the concrete mix design, pre-loading condition, com-
pressive strength, SCM and aggregate materials utilized.
Fibre-reinforced mortar containing RHA, nano-alumina, and
polypropylene fibres (PPF) obtained the highest flexural strength.
The high flexural strength was attributed to the presence of PPF,
which improved the ductility of the mortar by providing bridging
action, which enhanced the fracture energy and consequently flex-
ural strength of the mortar. On the other hand, the nano-Al2O3 (NA)
enhanced the load transfer from the matrix to the fibre. These syn-
ergistic interactions were responsible for the high flexural strength
of the fibre reinforced mortar. Similar effect was observed in pre-
stressed steel fibre-reinforced concrete beams, which obtained
the second highest flexural strength. This implies presence of fibres
enhances the energy absorption capacity of concrete structures
and consequently their flexural strength. Enhancement of flexural
strength of concrete by nano-Al2O3, polypropylene and steel fibres
was also corroborated by other studies [180–182].
Concrete mortar containing waste glass (CRT) and fluidized fly
ash recorded the least flexural strength. This concrete mixture
lacked the benefits of the bridging action of the fibres as well as
load –transfer benefits caused by nano-alumina.
5.2.3. Splitting tensile strength and modulus of elasticity
Splitting tensile strength (STS) obtained by different researchers
were displayed in Fig. 10. The highest STS of 5:3 N=mm2
was
obtained by Jalal et al. [39] with SF and NS followed by
5:07 N=mm2
obtained using waste glass [86].
FA-blended cements recorded low splitting tensile strength
(STS) which was linked to reduction in the quality of the ITZ [57]
and in order to meet the minimum requirements for use in struc-
tural lightweight concrete, Kockal and Ozturan [126] recom-
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Compressivestrengthatdifferentcuringdays
(MPa)
Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete
7
28
90
Fig. 8. Compressive strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized in green concrete.
Table 1
Materials utilized in different green concrete in Fig. 8.
Author(s) Waste materials used as SCM Type of green
concrete/mortar
Çakır and
Sofyanlı
[37]
SF + RAC Recycled aggregate
concrete
Jalal et al. [39] SF + NS HPSCC
Xu et al. [171] RHA 30 min RHA blended paste
Xu et al. [171] SF RHA blended paste
Xu et al. [171] Raw RHA RHA blended paste
Mohseni et al.
[176]
Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPO Fiber-reinforced
mortar
Mohseni et al.
[176]
RHA only Fiber-reinforced
mortar
Yang et al.
[207]
RHA + BOFS RHA-based
composite
Bog˘a et al.
[213]
GGBFS + CNI GGBFS modified
concrete
FA50 L HVFAC
Aliabdo et al.
[86]
25%addition of waste glass powder
(45 MPa cement)
Glass powder
mortar
Aliabdo et al.
[86]
25%cement replacement with WG
powder (45 MPa cement)
Glass powder
mortar
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1071](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-10-320.jpg)
![mended curing period between 50 and 90 days. Benaicha et al.
[172] observed increase in modulus of elasticity (MOE) in SF-
modified concrete with increasing SF contents while Tatikonda
[183] recommended optimum RHA content of 5% to obtain maxi-
mum MOE irrespective of the cement/concrete grade used as dis-
played in Fig. 11.
In addition, Chik et al. [184] reported increase in MOE with
increasing rice husk content and recommended 15% optimum
RHA cement replacement which also gave the highest compressive
strength of 6:70 N=mm2
. Siddique and Kaur [185] reported that
MOE reduced with increasing elevated temperatures but increased
with GGBFS content as displayed in Fig. 12. Abdallah and Fan [145]
observed increase in MOE with curing age and with increased
waste glass content in concrete which was attributed to the higher
MOE of waste glass compared to natural glass.
5.2.4. Shrinkage and creep
Rovnaník et al. [186] reported increased shrinkage with
increased brick powder waste content because of the high water
absorption of brick powder waste as shown in Fig. 13. Kayali
[187] reported 33% reduction in shrinkage with fly ash aggregate
as well as 22% reduction in weight and 20% increase in strength.
This implies fly ash aggregate can be utilized in the production of
stronger and lighter green concrete with reduced transportation
costs especially for precast elements. Also, results by Haranki
[188] revealed that care must be taken in the selection and prepa-
ration of aggregate to be utilized in green concrete to minimize
shrinkage in green concrete.
According to Serdar et al. [189], the four major types of shrink-
age are plastic shrinkage, carbonation shrinkage, autogenous
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Flexuralstrengthatdifferentcuringdays(MPa)
Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete
7
28
90
Fig. 9. Flexural strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized in green concrete.
Table 2
Materials utilized in different green concrete in Fig. 9.
Author(s) Waste materials used as SCM Type of green concrete/mortar
Jalal et al. [39] SF + NS HPSCC
Mohseni et al. [176] Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPF Fiber-reinforced mortar
Mohseni et al. [176] RHA only Fiber-reinforced mortar
Yang et al. [207] RHA + BOF RHA-based composite
Benaicha et al. [172] Cement + Limestone filler + SF30 Self-compacting concrete
Benaicha et al. [172] Cement + Limestone filler Self-compacting concrete
Sathawane et al. [178] 22.5%FA + 7.5%RHA RHA + FA modified concrete
Walczak et al. [179] Cement + CRT80%+20%FFA + Expanded clay Waste glass concrete
Walczak et al. [179] Cement + CRT100%+Expanded clay Waste glass concrete
Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 1.5%Steel fibres Prestressed steel fibre reinforced concrete beam
Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 1.5%Steel fibres Non- Prestressed steel fibre reinforced concrete beam
Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 0%Steel fibres Prestressed plain concrete beam
Karri et al. [138] GGBFS40% (M40) GGBFS concrete
Karri et al. [138] GGBFS40% (M20) GGBFS concrete
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
SF+RAC SF+NS WG
addiƟon
WG FA+RHA GGBFS GGBFS
Spliƫngtensilestrengthatdifferent
curingdays(N/mm2)
Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete
7
28
90
Fig. 10. Splitting tensile strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized
in green concrete.
1072 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-11-320.jpg)
![shrinkage and drying shrinkage. While the first two were caused
by poor curing and carbonation, the last two were caused by drying
and moisture loss. Creep is induced significantly by internal rela-
tive humidity (IRH) and increased with increasing RHA content
in concrete [190]. Addition of 10% SF was suggested to minimize
shrinkage and cracking potential of UHPC [191]. 15% RHA was rec-
ommended for optimum creep reduction. Creep reduction of
5560% can be achieved using HVFA of 55–65% fly ash content
[192].
Barrett et al. [193] suggested the use of pre-wetted LWAs in
HVFAC to induce internal curing effect resulting in improved
early-age strength as well as reduction in autogenous shrinkage
and tensile stresses. Atisß [194] stated that high strength HVFAC
with lower shrinkage compared to OPC and lower water consump-
tion can be utilized in construction of road pavement and large
industrial floors. Ling [195] recommended the use of limewater
and ultra-fine fly ash to augment the low-strength development
of HVFAC.
Drying shrinkage has a non-linear relationship with ambient
relative humidity (RH) [196]. The authors also reported that aggre-
gate grading and maximum aggregate size affects shrinkage strain.
The non-linear relationship grows with increasing aggregate size.
Drying shrinkage strain of ambient-cured specimens were com-
pared to heat-cured specimens [197].
Serdar et al. [189] recommended the utilization of quaternary
cement blends (FA, slag limestone) to obtain shrinkage and creep
deformation similar to CEM II cement and to minimize negative
impact of binary SCMs in concrete. In addition, Wallah and Rangan
[197] reported that the specific creep of FA-based GPC was that of
Portland cement concrete (PCC) because of block-polymerisation
concept. The concept describes the behaviour of the fly ash atoms
which acts as micro-aggregates in the system resulting in the
increase in the creep resistance of FA-based GPC compared to
PCC. The specific creep was observed to reduce with CS. This rela-
tionship was also reported by Folliard et al. [198]. The authors also
mentioned that early age creep tends to be higher than at later
ages. Wallah [199] reported that creep strain, creep coefficient
and specific creep of FA-based GPC decreased with increasing CS.
High creep strains were observed at early ages of HVFAC
because of slow strength development [62,200]. The low creep
strains of HVFAC was attributed to the ‘micro-aggregate effect’ of
the unreacted FA remaining in the concrete. As much as 50% creep
reduction was reported by combined effect of SP and HVFA [201].
Strain due to both creep and shrinkage is due to removal of
adsorbed water, applied stress, pore refinement and increase in
fine pores, and improvement in microstructure of the ITZ [48]. SF
decreased specific creep at all ages and long-term drying shrinkage
as well.
Gifford and Ward [202] reported that fly ash reduces creep by
increasing the elastic modulus and contributing to the total aggre-
gate as well as reduction of paste volume. Yuan and Cook [203]
reported high creep strain at high cement replacements with fly
ash while Lohtia et al. [204] recommended 15%FA replacement of
cement as optimum for strength, elasticity, shrinkage and creep.
Contrary to literatures, Klausen et al. [205] observed that FAC of
17% and 33% FA contents exhibited similar compressive and tensile
creep behaviour throughout the hardening phase. In addition, the
specific creep development was found to increase with fly ash
content.
Since water plays a crucial role in creep mechanism, addition of
SF is useful in restricting moisture movement [191]. However, the
authors reported that there is no interaction between creep and
shrinkage. According to Forth [206], tensile creep is about 2–3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 5 10 15
ModulusofelasƟcityfordifferent
concretegrade(GPa)
Rice husk ash content (%)
60
80
100
Fig. 11. Modulus of elasticity for different concrete grades of RHA-modified
concrete [183].
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 20 40 60
ReducƟoninModulusofelasƟcityat
differentelevatedtemperature(%)
GGBFS cement replacement (%)
100
200
300
Fig. 12. Reduction in modulus of elasticity at different elevated temperature (°C) at
different GGBFS content [185].
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
04:00 03:01 1.5:1.5 00:04
Shrinkage(%)
Fly ash/Brick powder raƟo
Fig. 13. Effects of brick powder content on shrinkage [186].
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1073](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-12-320.jpg)
![times greater than compressive creep and that both are affected by
relative humidity. The author also reported that ultimate tensile
creep has a decreasing non-linear relationship with compressive
strength for different applied stresses and that the presence of
microcracks in the ITZ enhances tensile creep.
5.3. Durability properties
5.3.1. Water absorption and porosity
Yang et al. [207] recommended a maximum cement replace-
ment levels 6 60% in order to avoid adverse impact on the perfor-
mance of the concrete as a result of increased water demand of the
SCM. It was also noted that water absorption of ternary blends
cement comprising RHA and BOF produced by Yang et al. [207]
was less than that of ternary blend derived from fly ash and lime-
stone by Shafigh et al. [57].
Parghi and Alam [208] observed that water absorption reduced
with increase in recycled glass powder content while bulk density
decreases. Aliabdo et al. [59] reported that cement addition caused
decrease in both water absorption and porosity of GPC as revealed
in Fig. 14.
In another study by Aliabdo et al. [86], water absorption and
voids ratio was found to reduce with increase in waste glass pow-
der addition as a result of the pore filling and pozzolanic action of
waste glass powder. Investigation by Binici [209] revealed that
water absorption reduces with increase in alkali activation temper-
ature but the reduction exhibited differs from one material to
another as depicted in Fig. 15.
Tian and Zhang [210] reported that water absorption and
apparent porosity varies with different curing ages and fly ash-
cement ratios as displayed in Figs. 16 and 17. This implies that
SCM-cement ratio, the apparent porosity and water absorption of
the SCM used in a green concrete affects their mechanical perfor-
mance. Hesami et al. [21] also reported decrease in porosity with
increase in RHA combined with PPS, glass and steel fibres irrespec-
tive of water-cement ratio and recommended optimum RHA con-
tent of between 8 and 10% and water-cement ratio of 0.33.
Momtazi and Zanoosh [211] reported that waste rubber tire and
polypropylene fibre (PPF) can be used to reduce water absorption
of RHA-cement composite.
5.3.2. Chloride penetration and alkali silica reaction (ASR)
Siddique et al. [212] reported improved resistance to chloride
penetration with bacterial rice husk ash concrete (BRHAC) com-
pared to results obtained by Bog˘a et al. [213] as shown in Fig. 18
and recommended 10% RHA replacement of cement as optimum
value. Gastaldini et al. [34] revealed that lower chloride penetra-
tion was obtained at lower water/cement ratio of 0.5 compared
to 0.65 and that chloride penetration control of RHA was higher
compared to SF (see Fig. 19).
Parghi and Alam [208] recommended inclusion of 25% recycled
glass particle of size 300 lm in combination with 10% FA+ 10% SF
to make superior mortar with ASR expansion 10% specified by
ASTM C1260. Abdallah and Fan [145] reported increased reduction
in ASR expansion with increased waste glass content as natural
sand replacement with curing age. This occurrence was attributed
to reduction in available alkali due to the consumption of lime by
the silica in the finely grounded waste glass.
SF was also observed to exhibit about 40% and 14.3% chloride
penetration resistance more than RHA at the same cement replace-
ment ratio of 5% and 10% and w=b ratio of 0.6 and 3 days curing age
[34]. Chloride penetration resistance of 11.9% and 50% for RHA and
52.4% and 64.3% for SF at 5% and 10% cement replacements respec-
tively were recorded at 91 days–3 days curing age.
Hassan et al. [214] reported that SF achieved lowest chloride
penetration compared to FA and OPC at both early ages but compa-
rable characteristics with SF at long-term ages. In HPC, SF was
found to contribute more to permeability reduction (87%) and pore
reduction (25%) than CS. Rostami and Behfarnia [215] reported
chloride penetration resistance of 26.7%, 38.5% and 49.6% at 5%,
10% and 15% SF replacement of cement.
Zareei et al. [216] achieved 78.4% reduction in chloride penetra-
tion in HPC containing 25% RHA replacement of cement and 10%
microsilica from 4306 Coulumbs to 928 Coulombs. [157] achieved
52.36% reduction in chloride penetration from 19 mm to 9.5 mm
through the use of HVFA SCC containing 60% FA and 10% SF. They
reported that concrete cover of 20 mm concrete cover is not suffi-
cient to protect steel reinforcement from chloride ingress even in
high quality SCC.
Matos and Sousa-Coutinho [217] reported that SF and WG were
effective in reduction of ASR. A reduction of 76.85% reduction was
achieved at 20% WG content. Waste glass powder also achieved
52.47% reduction in chloride diffusion in mortar. An optimum of
10% WG content was recommended to achieve best durability
properties [152].
Siddique and Bennacer [169] reported improved chloride bind-
ing capacity with increasing GGBS content but it is affected by the
presence of sulfates. Cheng et al. [218] reported 81.9% chloride
penetration resistance using 60% GGBS replacement of cement at
w/cm ratio of 0.55 from 10271coulombs to 1864 coulombs. The
improvement in chloride penetration resistance was attributed to
pore refinement and densification of the concrete system.
Cracking potential can be minimized by limiting unrestrained
shrinkage of concrete mixtures [219]. Their results showed that
FA exhibited the greatest drying shrinkage compared to nanosilica
and GGBS cement. Also, chloride penetration was observed to
reduce with increasing curing age, increasing cement replacements
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0% 5% 10% 15%
WaterabsorpƟon(%)
Porosity(%)
Cement addiƟon to Geopolymer concrete (%)
WA
Porosity
Fig. 14. Effects of cement addition in geopolymer concrete [59].
1074 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-13-320.jpg)
![with RHA and SF but reduced with increasing w/b ratio. Balapour
et al. [220] reported that combination of nano-RHA (2.5%) and
micro-RHA (12.5%) produced the best chloride penetration resis-
tance. In fact, their combination achieved chloride penetration
resistance of 71.2% at 90 days compared to control. This value
was higher than 36.2% recorded by 2.5% nano-RHA utilized alone.
From the results above, it seems the order of preference in
terms of resistance to chloride penetration is GGBS RHA SF
FA WG. However, experiments are required to check or confirm
this order of preference for chloride penetration resistance using
the same experimental conditions such as similar cement replace-
ment levels, w/cm ratio, curing age at testing, amongst others for
accurate comparison purposes.
Alkali silica reaction is a concrete durability problem where sil-
ica forms in aggregates react with alkali pore solutions to form
expansive reaction products, resulting in deleterious concrete
cracking [221]. Effectiveness of any SCM to mitigate ASR depends
on the SCM composition (SiO2 and alkali content), SCM %, type of
alkali aggregate reaction, type and fineness of alkali-contents of
cement [222]. SCMs reduce ASR through pozzolanic reaction which
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
GGBFS Fly ash Silica sand Pumice
WaterabsorpƟon(%)atdifferent
acƟvaƟontemperature
Different materials used as alkali acƟvators
100
150
Fig. 15. Water absorption for different materials at varied activation temperatures (°C) [209].
0
5
10
15
20
25
28 days
3 months
6 months
10 months
WaterabsorpƟonatdifferentfly
ash-cementraƟos(%)
Water curing ages
1.2
1.6
2
Fig. 16. Water absorption of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and
fly ash-cement ratios [210].
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 days 3 months 6 months 10 months
Apparentporosityatdifferentflyash-
cementraƟos(%)
Water curing age
1.2
1.6
2
Fig. 17. Apparent porosity of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and
fly ash-cement ratios [210].
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
RHAC BRHAC GGBFS+CNI GGBFS+CNI GGBFS
Rapidchloridepermeabilityatdifferent
curingdays(Coulombs)
Different SCMs used in green concrete
7
28
56
90
Fig. 18. Rapid chloride penetration at different curing days for different SCMs.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0% 30% 40% 50%
Compressivestrengthatdifferent
curingages,differentconcretegrades
differentacidsoluƟons(N/mm2)
GGBFS replacement of cement
28M40H2SO4
28M40HCl
28M20H2SO4
28M20HCl
90M40H2SO4
90M40HCl
90M20H2SO4
90M20HCl
Fig. 19. Compressive strength at different GGBFS cement replacements, different
curing age, different grades of concrete in different acid solutions [138].
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1075](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-14-320.jpg)
![reduces concrete permeability and ASR consumption of available
alkali ions [223].
According to Christopher et al. [221], contrary views were pre-
sented concerning the effects of RHA on ASR in concrete. While
Hasparyk et al. [224] recommended between 12 and 15% of RHA
to control ASR, Le [225] reported that RHA contributes to ASR by
acting as micro-reactive aggregate to produce expansive ASR prod-
ucts. This contradiction was resolved by Zerbino et al. [226] who
reported that RHA can inhibit or promote ASR depending on its
particle size. Therefore, the authors recommended careful selection
of cement, equipment and mixing cycle, as well as adaptation of
the mixing process. In another study which spanned three years,
they observed stable mechanical properties at alkali contents
(Na2O) 3 kg=m3
. Their results were corroborated in another
study which revealed that RHA produced through controlled incin-
eration exhibited stronger ASR inhibition effect compared to resid-
ual RHA produced via uncontrolled burning [227]. ASR reductions
of 51.4% and 83.8% were obtained at 10 and 20% CRHA (RHA from
controlled burning) while reductions of 2.7%, 37.8%, 70.3% and
94.6% were produced at 10% 20%, 30% and 40% RRHA (RHA from
uncontrolled burning) cement replacements in mortar bars at w/
cm ratio of 0.47.
Le [225] reported that SF was more effective than RHA in miti-
gating ASR expansion in mortar. The suggested the use of RHA of
fine particle size 5.7 lm to mitigate ASR expansion.
At 20% cement replacement with SF, FA, WG, CRHA and RRHA,
the ASR expansion obtained were 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.02%, 0.06% and
0.23%, which corresponded to percentage reductions of 88.9%,
66%, 83.8% and 37.8% for FA, WG, CRHA and RRHA [64,88,227].
Furthermore, Oberholster and Westra [228] reported that SF
performed better than FA in mitigating ASR. At 20% cement
replacement, they obtained ASR values of 0:03%, 0:02% and 0.2
for SF, FA and cement. These results correspond to ASR reductions
of 85% and 65% respectively with reference to the control, which
lends credence to the superiority of SF over FA in mitigating ASR.
In another study, Buck [229] recorded ASR values of 0:15% and
0.47 at 30% GGBS cement replacement and 0% (control), which
corresponds to ASR reduction of 68:1%. Therefore, from the results
above, it seems the ranking of the SCMs in terms of ASR mitigation
is SF FA CRHA GGBS WG RRHA. Nevertheless, confirma-
tory laboratory and field investigations are required to confirm this
order of ranking.
Lindgård et al. [230] mentioned that SCMs low in calcium and
high in silica are the most effective in reducing pore solution alka-
linity and consequently ASR expansion. The authors called for reli-
able methods for satisfactory, accelerated and affordable testing
methods that resembles field conditions such as humidity, alkali
content and temperature.
ASR expansion was reported to decrease in concrete when WG
was utilized as fine aggregates as a result of reduction of available
lime [88]. ASR reductions of 66%, 41:7% and 16:7%were obtained
at 20%, 15% and 10%WG replacement of fine aggregate.
ASR expansion was investigated between 25 and 100% cement
replacements [231] and was found to depend on WG content and
glass colour. They recommended the use of FA and Li2CO3 for
reduction of ASR expansion. In contrast, Özkan and Yüksel [232]
mentioned that glass colour does not have significant influence
on both ASR and elevated temperature resistance. They advocated
the utilization of FA and GGBFS to reduce ASR expansion.
5.3.3. Fire-resistance and chemical attack properties
Karri et al. [138] investigated the effects of chemical acid attack
on GGBFS modified concrete at different curing ages using two
grades of concrete (20 and 40 MPa). CS increased for some of the
concrete as shown in Fig. 13 and may be due to chemical reactions
of the acid with the GGBFS and other concrete constituents. It was
suggested that GGBFS cement replacement should not exceed 40%
with respect to durability considerations and that the acid seems
to promote pozzolanic reactions in the GGBFS modified concrete.
SF had considerable influence on residual CS at 300°C.
Strength retention was 84:1%, 85:2%, 68:8% and 26:8% at 10%
SF replacement of cement in SFC, at elevated temperatures of
100, 200, 300 and 400°C. Their strength retention was greater than
the corresponding values of 84:1%, 85:2%, 68:8% and 26:8% exhib-
ited at 6% cement replacement [233]. The strength loss was attrib-
uted to weakening of the ITZ weakening of the bonding between
aggregate and paste and chemical decomposition of hydration
products. Also, strength recovery of 1.3–3.7% was observed at
200 °C. in all the concretes.
Bernal et al. [234] reported strength retention of 94:5%, 60:9%,
and 47:3%, for SF and 103:6%, 46:4%, and 48:2%, for RHA at
200 °C., 400 °C and 600 °C. The results showed that SF exhibited
higher strength retention than RHA. Only RHA-based system
retained measurable strength after 800 °C.
Rashad [235] reported CS of 45.92 MPa for HVFAC at 70% FA
replacement of cement and 400 °C., which was lower compared
to 67 MPa and 52 MPa for SF and RHA in alkali-activated pastes
reported by Bernal et al. [234] at the same temperature. In addi-
tion, increase in CS was observed at 400 °C in all the mixtures
and was attributed to the densification of the matrix. The increas-
ing strength loss recorded from 400 to 1000 °C. was attributed to
loss of water, increasing porosity and permeability. In addition,
HVFAC exhibited better fire performance compared to neat con-
crete while inclusion of GGBS showed negative effects on CS at ele-
vated temperature.
FA-GP showed low thermal stability at elevated temperatures
between 800 and 1000 °C, which was attributed to increase in
average pore size and replacement of amorphous structure with
crystalline Na-feldspars [98]. The Class F fly ash-based GP prepared
using Na activator recorded CS of 30 MPa, 33 MPa, 37 MPa, 38 MPa,
14 MPa and 12 MPa at 200 °C, 400 °C, 600 °C, 800 °C, 1000 °C and
1200 °C respectively. On the other hand, FA-GP prepared using
potassium silicate exhibited deterioration of CS after 1000 °C,
while the amorphous structure remained. This demonstrates that
Class F fly ash-based GP materials cannot be utilized in refractory
insulation applications as a result of the large reductions in CS
and high shrinkage between 800 °C and 1200 °C.
HSC made with SF ð15:4%Þ and FA (38:5% of cement content)
experienced CS reduction of 74:4% from 97.3 MPa to 24.9 MPa at
elevated temperature of 800 °C [236]. On the other hand, normal
concrete (NC) showed 54:7% reduction in CS at the same temper-
ature. The deterioration in both HSC and NC was linked to variation
in the pore structure.
HSC containing 9% SF wt. of cement recorded CS marginal
strength loss between 100 and 400 °C and significant loss between
55 and 80% after 400 °C [237]. Janotka and Nürnbergerová [238]
reported strength deterioration between 100 and 200 °C in HSC
with SF content of 7:53% by wt of cement at w=c ratio of 0.32
and was linked to pore-structure coarsening. Kong et al. [239]
reported that FA-GP pastes recorded 6% strength increase at CS
of 62.8 MPa and 11% mass loss at elevated temperature of
800 °C, compared to unexposed specimens. The CS increase was
attributed to the low moisture loss, presence of high proportion
of micropores and high solid-to-liquid ratio.
Reported that fly ash-to-activator ratio is the most critical
parameter for fire resistance and strength development in GPs
and suggested optimum combination of Na2SiO3=KOH of 2.5 and
FA=activator of 2.5. Increase in strength of GPs at elevated temper-
atures was attributed to both polymerization reaction and sinter-
ing. In another study, Kong and Sanjayan [240] revealed that
1076 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-15-320.jpg)
![aggregate size and their rate of expansion are influential parame-
ters which affect the performance of GPC ate elevated temperature.
While small aggregates (10 mm) promote spalling and extensive
cracking, large aggregates (10 mm) were observed to be stable.
Pan et al. [241] reported 15% strength loss at temperatures
500 and 56% between 500 and 800 °C in fine glass powder mor-
tar. The strength loss was attributed to reduction in calcium
hydroxide (CH) in GP mortar, softening of glass content and higher
incompatibility between paste and sand particles.
Poon et al. [242] reported that PFA (pulverized FA) followed by
GGBS exhibited better performance at elevated temperature com-
pared to SF in concrete and could be utilized where there is high
risk of fire. Optimum cement replacements of cement by FA and
GGBS in HSC and NSC to retain maximum strength and durability
were 30% and 40% respectively [242]. In contrast, SFC with more
than 5% cement replacement should be avoided because of
explosive spalling.
Based on the results, the order of preference in terms of CS per-
formance at elevated temperature was FA GGBS SF. Average
strength loss were 44% and 60% in FA- and SF-based HSC and
GGBS-based NSC.
Rashad et al. [243] reported increasing residual strength at ele-
vated temperatures when GGBS was used as sand replacements in
AAS (alkali activated slag) mortar. Residual strength losses
obtained at 800 °C were 33:45%, 51:91%, 69:49%, and 90%, at
25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%, replacement of sand respectively. Also,
enhancement in residual strength at 200 and 400 °C were 19:31%,
79:26%, 89:73%, and 100:95%, and 20:89%, 64:28%, 71:86%, and
82:58%, at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%, replacement of sand respec-
tively. No micro-crack was found in the AAS mortar throughout all
the elevated temperature tests.
Tanyildizi and Coskun [244] investigated LWC incorporating 0,
10, 20, and 30% FA replacement of cement at elevated temperature
of 200, 400 and 800 °C. CS ranges of 38–48 MPa, 35–38 MPa and
14–23 MPa were recorded at 200, 400 and 800 °C. The percentage
retained strength obtained ranges from 91.09–98.95%, 80.23–
92.6% and 36.13–43.64% at 200, 400 and 800 °C respectively. The
loss in CS was linked to loss of hydration water at elevated temper-
atures. With respect to the splitting tensile strength (STS), the per-
centage STS retained ranges from 87.84–91.85%, 81.94–85.55% and
23.55–43.15% at 200, 400 and 800 °C respectively. Based on
ANOVA analysis, the most important experimental parameters
for STS and CS of FAC were heating degree and fly ash content
and their percentage contribution to CS development were
93:41% and for CS and 89:39% and 4:84%. In order to achieve opti-
mum CS and STS, the optimum FA content recommended was 30%.
Concrete made with fine waste glass replacing fine recorded the
highest CS compared to coarse WGC and combination of fine and
coarse WG [245]. Optimum WG content to achieve maximum CS
at both ambient and elevated temperature was 10% aggregate
replacement for the three combination types. CS of the three con-
crete converged close to 700 °C because of its closeness to the
melting temperature of waste glass, which is between 700 and
800 °C and the elimination of size effect in the softened state of
the glass aggregates. CS obtained for the fine WGC were 40.5, 35,
55, 42, 34.5 and 22 at 20, 60, 150, 300, 500 and 700 °C.
Pulverized FAC expressed relative strength improvement at 450
and 650 °C even though durability deteriorated from 250 °C [246].
CS loss was attributed to increased width of ITZ, increased total
porosity and coarsening of the hardened cement paste.
RHA is more effective than FA in resisting sulphate attack of
binary cement mortars. Surprisingly, the RHA mortar experienced
strength enhancement of 7% compared to 0% for FA after 90-day
immersion in 5% sodium sulphate solution and at 20% cement
replacement [247]. However, fly ash experienced higher strength
improvement of 8:8% compared to RHA which recorded 24:6%
strength reduction both at 40% cement replacement after 90 days.
Optimum RHA and FA replacement of cement to ensure CS reten-
tion and development is 20% and 40% respectively.
Chatveera and Lertwattanaruk [248] recommended 20% RHA
replacement of cement durability improvement in concrete and
enhancement of resistance to HCl and H2SO4. The resistance to acid
attack was observed to be directly proportional to the
ðSiO2 þ Al2O3 þ Fe2O3Þ=CaO ratio. The improved resistance of RHA
was also corroborated was attributed to the densification of its
microstructure, physical and pozzolanic effect as well as presence
of Al2O3 [227]. Strength improvement was also recorded at 25%
RHA replacement of cement with 0.1 H2SO4 [249].
Chemical resistance of FA and SF to several chemical such as
H2SO4, HNO3, acetic acid, H3PO4, Na2SO4, and MgSO4 was investi-
gated by [250]. They reported that SF had superior resistance at
higher cement replacement from 15%. SF exhibited lower strength
loss of 16:6% and 17:8% compared to 23:5% and 38:9% for FA at
15% and 22:5% cement replacements respectively.
Chemical resistance of FA is influenced by its fineness. CS
increased from 41.5, 53.5, 56, and 61.5 MPa for increasing Blaine
fineness of 3000, 3900, 4800 and 9300 cm3
/g [251]. The optimum
replacement level to achieve chemical acid resistance varies
depends on the type of acid and alkaline solutions involved
[252]. It seems the chemical acid resistance of FA was more effec-
tive at higher replacements compared to SF. The sulfate resistance
was linked to the prevention of ingress of sulfate ions into con-
crete, resulting in little formation of gypsum and/or ettringite in
concrete [253]. The level of resistance to chemical attack increases
with increasing cement content, lowering of w=c ratio and the uti-
lization of cement with C3A (tricalcium aluminate) content 7%
[254].
Chemical resistance of GGBS depends on high reactivity in the
presence of lime, availability of Ca in the pore solution and its dis-
tribution in the specimen [255]. GGBS performed better than FA on
exposure to leaching and sulphate attack [256]. The authors
reported that hydration of C3S and C2S in cements resulted in for-
mation of portlandite, which when released, facilitates ingress of
sulphate ions and produce expansive products such as gypsum
and ettringite. Likewise, GGBS performed better than FA in resist-
ing attack from MgSO4 as it recorded the higher CS28 [257].
Up to 50% GGBS can be used in concrete to achieve good
sulphate-resisting properties, minimize carbonation as well as
thermal cracking [258]. Also, concrete containing up to 70% GGBS
showed good resistance to thaumasite form of sulphate attack
(TSA) and their resistance was improved with the addition of small
amounts of calcium carbonate or calcium sulfate [259,260]. GGBS
exhibited stronger resistance to sulphate attack compared to fly
ash and the optimum cement replacement for GGBS was 40%
[261]. Even though GGBS has good resisting capability, O’Connell
et al. [262] pointed out that GGBS should not be utilized in
wastewater infrastructures because it cannot withstand the high
levels of sulphate and sulphuric acid attack.
Waste glass improved durability of WGC by maintaining weight
stability during sulphate attack [263]. In addition, field studies cov-
ering 6.7 years showed continuous improvement in mechanical
performance of slabs and walls made with WGC [264]. Glass fume
made from WG particles were observed to exhibit higher resis-
tance to sulphate attack [265].
Ganjian and Pouya [266] reported that OPC concrete performed
better than SFC when exposed to tidal environment while mixture
of SF and GGBS exhibited worse performance. Makhloufi et al.
[267] reported that mortar made with quaternary blends including
GGBS showed improved sulphate attack resistance than OPC con-
crete. Aziz et al. [268] reported that up to 30% GGBS improved
the durability of sulphate resisting cement (SRC) and can be used
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1077](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-16-320.jpg)
![to produce highly durable concrete. The improvement was attrib-
uted to decrease of total pore volume, free lime content, total chlo-
ride, total sulphate contents and, subsequently, increase in the
resistivity towards sulphate and chloride ions.
From the above results, it seems the preferable ranking of the
SCMs in terms of resistance to sulphate attack was
WG SF GGBS FA RHA. However, confirmatory laboratory
and field investigations are suggested to check this ranking.
6. Factors that influence properties of green concrete
6.1. SCM chemical composition
Comparison of the chemical composition of the five (5) different
SCMs and OPC revealed that, on the average, SF has the highest SiO2
(silica content), followed by RHA. Also, it was observed that fly ash
recorded the highest Al2O3 (alumina) content followed by GGBFS.
In terms of CaO (calcium oxide) content, OPC recorded the highest
value followed by GGBFS as depicted in Fig. 20.
6.2. Water/binder (w/b) ratio
Hu et al. [14] observed that higher water/cement ðw=cÞ ratio
leads to lower Ca=Si ratio, large pores, higher porosity of the C-S-
H gel which causes lower elastic modulus and lower hardness.
The authors recommended lower water-cement ratio and incorpo-
ration of admixtures to improve mechanical properties of cementi-
tious materials. The connection between lower porosity and lower
w/b ratio was also corroborated by Gao et al. [269] who also
observed that ITZ porosity decreases with increasing curing age,
decreasing water ratio and increasing aggregate content. Both
Hesami et al. [21] and Lian and Zhuge [270] recommended 0.33
as the optimum w=c ratio for pervious concrete pavement to
ensure full hydration and formation of strong cement pastes.
6.3. Curing medium
Yazıcı et al. [271] demonstrated that curing condition affects
the mechanical performance of reactive powder concrete (RPC).
Autoclaved curing gave the highest flexural strengths compared
to steam curing and standard curing as shown in Figs. 21 and 22.
Bog˘a et al. [213] also reported that increasing the curing periods
and applying standard water curing method resulted in significant
improvement in the mechanical properties of the concrete. Nath
and Sarker [272] reported that even though heat-curing provided
early-age strength, it is not replicable at available cast-in situ
construction.
According to Neupane [65], elevated temperature curing is not
cost-effective and practicable. Furthermore, results obtained by
Binici et al. [128] and Shafigh et al. [57] depicted in Fig. 23 revealed
that water curing obtained the highest CS at 90 days curing age
compared to autoclaving curing. Therefore, water curing is recom-
mended for curing green concrete to enable full hydration, chemi-
cal reaction and bonding of the constituents.
7. Binary, ternary and quarternary SCM mixtures
The concept of binary, ternary and quaternary SCM is to obtain
blended SCM with properties that are superior than the individual
SCM constituents. Utilization of such blended cements overcomes
the drawbacks associated with any of the individual constituent
and maximizes their individual strengths or advantages. While
Rakhimova and Rakhimov [66] recommended a component-wise
approach in the development and application of sustainable
cement and green concrete, Wang and Chen [273] presented a
simplex-centroid design method in determining the proportion of
various ternary blend SCM mixtures to achieve target strengths,
thereby reducing the need for trial and error mixes.
Mohamed [274] recommended ternary mix of cement with 10%
FA and 10% SF which obtained highest compressive strength in
SCC. Le and Ludwig [32] recommended ternary combination of
20% FA and 20% RHA to produce CS58 of approximately 130 MPa
which was recommended for usage in self-compacting high perfor-
mance concrete (SCHPC) which increased plastic viscosity and seg-
regation resistance but eliminated bleeding.
Deb et al. [275] investigated blending of GGBFS with low-
calcium Fly ash (Class F) and observed that the shrinkage reduced
with the increase in slag content and decrease in sodium silicate to
sodium hydroxide (SS=SH) ratio in GPC at room temperature.
In order derive the optimum benefits from the use of SCMs, it is
expedient that the combination and proportion of selected SCMs
for binary, ternary and quarternary SCM mixtures should be prop-
erly selected to maximize the synergistic positive effects and min-
imize or avoid the synergistic negative impacts. This is achievable
to some extent by taking into consideration the elemental compo-
sition of each SCM selected for combination, the individual
physico-chemical characteristics of each SCM and their effects on
concrete/mortar properties from available literatures.
0
20
40
60
80
100
SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO SO3 Na2O K2O P205 TiO2 LOI
ComposiƟon(%)
Chemical composiƟon
FA WG GGBFS RHA SF OPC
Fig. 20. Comparison of chemical composition of different SCMs and OPC (Authors).
1078 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-17-320.jpg)
![8. Nomenclature and applications of green concrete utilized in
concrete structures
Existing literatures on green concrete revealed the existence of
different nomenclatures for green concrete depending on the SCM
utilized, properties of the green concrete such as compressive
strength, performance levels, compactability and density as
depicted in Fig. 24. They include HVFAC (high-volume fly ash con-
crete), UHPC (ultra-high performance concrete), HPC (high perfor-
mance concrete), ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), HSC (high
strength concrete), SCC (self-consolidating concrete), LWC (light-
weight concrete) and geopolymer concrete (GPC).
8.1. HVFAC (High volume fly ash concrete)
High-volume fly ash concrete (HVFAC) are concrete mixtures
containing a minimum of 40–50% fly ash by mass of cementitious
materials [133,276]. HVFAC with 50% cement replacement with fly
ash C was utilized in the construction of Computer Science Build-
ing at York University and Lower Notch Dam in Ontario, Canada
and Bayview high-rise apartment and was recommended for com-
mercial and residential construction applications [61,277].
The strength development of HVFAC depends on fly ash replace-
ment levels, water-to-cementitious material ratios and volume of
cement paste [278]. While Rashad [279] recommended usage of
fly ash as partial or full replacement of natural fine aggregate in
HVFAC where fly ash is abundantly available and there is shortage
of natural sand as fine aggregate, Li [106] recommended the addi-
tion of nano-SiO2 as an accelerating additive to facilitate the poz-
zolanic properties of fly ash to improve the early and long-term
strength gain.
Mehta [280] classified HVFAC into three categories namely low,
moderate and high strength HVFAC with minimum CS28 of 20, 30
and 40 and corresponding water-cement ratios of 0.9–1.3, 0.72–
0.83 and 0.5–0.7 respectively.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
20 40 60
Flexuralstrength(Mpa)
GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%)
Bauxite Steam cured
Bauxite Autoclaved cured
Granite steam cured
Granite Autoclaved cured
Fig. 21. Effect of curing condition on Flexural strength and aggregate type [232].
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
20 40 60
Compressivestrength(Mpa)
GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%)
Bauxite autoclaved cured
Bauxite standard cured
Fig. 22. Comparison of compressive strength using autoclaved and standard curing
media [232].
0
10
20
30
40
50
Compressivestrengthatdifferentcuring
days(Mpa)
Different SCMs used in green concrete
90
56
28
Fig. 23. Compressive strength results for different curing methods.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1079](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-18-320.jpg)
![The benefits of HVFAC include easier flowability, pumpability
and compactability, superior resistance to cracking from thermal
shrinkage, autogenous shrinkage and drying shrinkage, cost reduc-
tion of construction costs and easy workability, reduction in crack
width [133,277,280,281].
In order to improve the implementation of HVFAC in the con-
struction industry, the best practice guide developed by Bentz
et al. [130] is recommended. Likewise, Shafigh et al. [57] recom-
mended the inclusion of oil palm shell as coarse aggregate and
limestone powder to reduce cement content by 46–60% and
improve CS at early and later ages, Alaka and Oyedele [131]
reported that super abundant SP dosage in HVAC helped to obtain
relatively lower w/b ratios with good workability.
8.2. UHPC (Ultra high performance concrete)
UHPC intends to optimize selected properties of concrete simul-
taneously which depends on the usage and exposure conditions of
the concrete in real-life applications.
Low water content and moderate SP dosage was recommended
by Yu et al. [123] in order to facilitate the pozzolanic reaction of the
constituent materials. Yu et al. [282] recommended the use of
nano-silica and hybrid fibres such as steel and polypropylene for
crack reduction and improvement in the flexural strength of UHPC.
While Yu et al. [283] reported the need to improve the workability
and cost efficiency of UHPC, Ghafari et al. [284] reiterated the need
to improve the sustainability of UHPC by reducing the cost through
use of lower SP dosage.
Kamal et al. [285] recommended the production of UHPC with
conventional local materials, while Van Breugel and Van Tuan
[286] suggested optimum combination of 10% RHA and 10% SF
to reduce autogenous shrinkage and costs of UHPC. Vaitkevicˇius
and Šerelis [287] recommended an optimal 15% replacement of
quartz powder with SF and addition of PPF to reduce brittle frac-
ture failure of UHPC. The authors recorded CS of 124 MPa and
138 MPa without and with heat treatment respectively.
According to Tagnit-Hamou et al. [288], UHPC has four classifi-
cations as shown in Table 3 and can be used in construction of
highly energy efficient, environmentally friendly, affordable and
resilient structures with CS ranging from 130-260 MPa, flexural
strength 15 MPa, tensile strength 10 MPa and elastic modulus
45 GPa using waste glass (WG). The UHPC was characterized by
excellent durability, negligible chloride-ion penetration, low
mechanical abrasion, very high resistance to freeze and thaw
cycles.
Furthermore, Kou and Xing [289] recommended the use of glass
powder and fly ash to lower the cost of production of UHPC. CS of
140–150 MPa was achieved under normal curing for 28 days. Gha-
fari et al. [290] recommended inclusion of optimal 3% content of
nanosilica cement replacement in UHPC to improve early-age
strength. The use of short steel fibres at higher fibre dosages was
also reported to yield benefits such as higher peak load capacity,
enhanced strain hardening, improved post-peak failure response
from explosive as well as ductile behavior [291,292].
In order to produce green UHPC with reduced cement content
and thereby lower cost, ultrafine by-product materials such as
ultrafine palm oil fuel ash (UPOFA-50% cement replacement) has
been recommended by Aldahdooh et al. [293] and Aldahdooh
et al. [294]. On the other hand, Xiao et al. [295] recommended
the use of superfine 40% GGBFS or combination of 10% fly ash
and 30% GGBFS cement replacements in UHPC which exhibited
ultra-high durability, high strength at low cost.
Gesoglu et al. [296] recommended the use of binary and ternary
blends cement blends in UHPC to obtain excellent resistance to sul-
phate attack, while Ghafari et al. [290] recommended addition of
nanosilica to improve early-age strength development of UHPC.
In addition, Ghafari et al. [284] advocated for eco-efficient, sustain-
able and cheaper UHPC with fly ash, GGBFS and RHA. Güneyisi
et al. [297] reported reduced HRWRA dosage, improved workabil-
ity, enhanced impermeability and increased CS with combined use
of nano silica and treated lightweight aggregates in UHPC.
Habel et al. [298] reported that the extremely low permeability
of the dense matrix of UHPC facilitates its use as waterproofing
layer in bridge decks. This was also corroborated by Habert et al.
[299] who advocated for the use of cast-in-place eco-UHPC in
bridge rehabilitation because it is fast, efficient, price competitive
and its extremely low permeability, high strength and deformabil-
ity. Hassan et al. [300] recommended the use of UHPC in slabs
because of its high tensile strength and improved ductility in
punching shear failure.
Kim et al. [301] recommended production of UHPC with
CS 120 at low w=b ratio using synergistic industrial slags as
cement and fine aggregate replacements in UHPC for enhanced
flowability and ecological benefits.
Common failure patterns reported in UHPC include shear ten-
sion, shear compression, diagonal tension and arch-rib failures
[285].
8.3. UHSC (Ultra high strength concrete)
In terms of compressive strength and modulus of elasticity,
UHSC performed better compared to NSC and HSC [302] despite
concerns of brittleness and fire resistance. Xiong and Liew [302]
reported that variation in the CS and MOE of UHSC at elevated tem-
perature as shown in Fig. 25 and depends on the quality of the
aggregate. Choe et al. [303] recommended the use of blends of
polypropylene fibres (PPF) and nylon fibres (NY) prevent spalling
in UHPC columns. Shi et al. [304] recommended optimal/synergis-
tic combination of 15% SF and 1–20% GGBFS to achieve UHPC with
CS of 125 MPa and improved flowability. Wu et al. [305] reported
that optimal dosage of 20% SF in UHSC as cement replacement,
resulted in reduction of porosity, pore refinement and strength
development.
The use of nanomaterials such as nano-CaCO3 and nano-SiO2
was encouraged by Wu et al. [306] and Wang et al. [307] because
of their contribution to early-age strength, homogeneous and less
porous concrete and prevention of agglomeration due to the nucle-
ation and filling effects. Also, El Mir et al. [308] recommended opti-
mum combination replacement of cement with 8–10% SF and 17–
20% SF to produce UHSC with 100 MPa and CS 120 MPa. Gesoglu
et al. [296] demonstrated that steam curing recorded higher CS of
31.2–147.9 MPa compared to CS of 120.8–142.1 MPa achieved
Green
concrete
HSC
UHPC
UHSC
SCC
HPC
LWC
HVFAC
Geopolymer
concrete
Fig. 24. Nomenclatures of green concrete utilized in concrete structures.
1080 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-19-320.jpg)
![with water-curing by accelerating the pozzolanic reaction of the SF
in the UHPC.
Romero et al. [309] reported that the mechanical response of
CFST (Concrete-filled steel tubular) slender columns depends on
the type of concrete used, the location of the concretes, and the
thicknesses of the inner and outer rings. Also, Yao et al. [310]
reported that UHSC encased steel beams recorded higher residual
shear capacity, better post-cracking stiffness and better shear duc-
tility than pre-stressed UHSC beams. Multi-curing was advocated
by Yazıcı [311] to achieve UHSC. UHSC with CS 120 MPa was
achieved with 8-h high-pressure steam curing (autoclaving).
Allena and Newtson [312] advocated production of UHPC using
local materials such as SF and steel fibres and achieved CS28 and
flexural strengths of 165.6 MPa and 18.3 MPa and 161.9 MPa and
10.93 MPa with and without fibres respectively at 0.25 w=c and
0.20 water/cementitious ratios. In addition, the seven-day CS
ðCS7Þ range of the UHSC ranged between 89.86 and 146.06 MPa.
8.4. LWC (Lightweight concrete)
Libre et al. [313] advocated the use of LWC incorporating steel
fibres in high rise, earthquake-resistant buildings because of bene-
fits such as reduced density, enhanced compressive and flexural
ductility as well as energy absorption capacity. This was also
corroborated by Choi et al. [314] who reported improvement in
flexural strength and toughness. Bui et al. [315] reported that
high-performance lightweight concrete (HPLWC) with CS of
49–57 MPa can be produced using 60% FA + 40% cement and
30% FA + 40% cement + 30% RHA.
According to Sivakumar and Gomathi [316], the lightweight
aggregates (LWA) utilized in LWC could be from industrial by-
products such as fly ash, bottom ash, SF, GGBFS, RH, slag, palm
oil shell and clay and yields benefits such as reduction of construc-
tion costs, ease of handling and construction of large precast units.
Yazdani and Goucher [317] recommended the use of multiple
wrapping using carbon FRP lightweight composites to strengthen
and upgrade existing bridges. They also suggested the use of SCM
and strong quality control measures to overcome the drawbacks
of lower MOE, higher creep and shrinkage of LWC, porosity and
bleeding and failure modes such as cracking, delamination and
rupture common in LWAC.
Kayali et al. [318] recommended the use of sintered FA along-
side polypropylene fibres or steel fibres to improve workability,
cohesiveness and compactability of LWC. Hwang et al. [319] rec-
ommended the use of sintered manufactured LWA produced at
1100 °C for the production of self-compacting LWC with CS28 range
of 25–55 MPa and unit weight of 1878–2057 kg=m3
. The self-
compacting LWC exhibited excellent flowability without bleeding
or segregation. On the other hand, Oyejobi et al. [320] recom-
mended 20% cement replacement with RHA for the production
of cheap and durable LWC.
RHA and waste glass was recommended by Torkaman et al.
[321] and Yu et al. [322] for the production of concrete blocks
and ultra-LWC which contributes to economic design of buildings
and environmental sustainability. Ling and Teo [323] recom-
mended optimum 10% RHA cement replacement in the manufac-
turing of load-bearing bricks which recorded highest CS of
17:51 N=mm2
.
LWC had superior characteristics such as thermal insulation,
fire/high temperature resistance, sound insulation, durability,
reduction of risk of earthquake damage and reduction of dead load
[324]. Self-compacting lightweight concrete offers benefit such as
lower susceptibility to corrosion in early age than normal SCC
[325].
Ünal et al. [326] reiterated that more opportunities exist for
LWA in concrete since aggregate constitute 70–80% by volume of
Portland cement concrete. Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [327]
advocated for rigorous mix proportioning to avoid conflicting
Table 3
Classification of UHPC [288].
Parameters Class A Class B Class C Class D (architecture)
Flowability Semi-flowable Flowable Highly flowable Highly flowable
Minimum slump (mm) 200 230 260 260
w/b ratio 0.15–0.19 0.19–0.225 0.225–0.25 0.225–0.25
Solids in SP/cement (wt%) 1–3 1–3 1–3 0.225–0.25
Steel fibre (%) 2 2 2 –
PVA fibre (%) – – – 2.5
2-day UHPGC CS (MPa) 200 175–200 160–175 –
28 day Normal concrete CS (MPa) 160 140 130 100
91-day Normal concrete CS (MPa) 180 150 140 120
Flexural Strength (MPa) 25 20 15 10
Modulus of Elasticity (GPa) 50 45 40 40
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
30 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Compressivestrength(MPa)
ModulusofElasƟcity(GPa)
Temperature (OC)
CS
MOE
Fig. 25. Compressive strength and Modulus of Elasticity of UHSC at elevated temperatures [263].
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1081](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-20-320.jpg)
![properties. Previous studies reported that addition of nano-silica,
SF and coal-bottom ash in LWC for improved durability
[328–330]. Kucharczyková et al. [331] advocated oven-dried
aggregate to improve the strength and durability of LWAC.
Shannag [332] recommended cement replacement of 5–15% SF
which produced LWC with CS range of 22.5–43 MPa and air dry-
density of 1935–1995 kg/m3
with benefits such as larger strain
capacity at failure and high degree of workability. Arisoy and Wu
[333] stated that the controlling parameters for production of
high-performance-LWC are water absorption rate, density and
microstructure. According to Thomas and Bremner [334], LWAC
produced using LWA exhibit improved properties because of inter-
nal curing provided by LWA.
Other LWA commonly used are clay aggregates, waste glass and
metakaolin, fly ash and GGBFS and polymer pellets with benefits
such as thermal insulation, improved MOE, reduced density, reduc-
tion of cement consumption, stoppage of bleeding and segregation
as a result of decrease in water absorption, good corrosion resis-
tance, reduction in sintering temperature, reduction of ASR and
increase in failure point loading [335–339].
8.5. HSC (High strength concrete)
Demirbog˘a and Gül [340] recommended the use of silica fume
alongside other SCMs to make HSC. Haque and Kayali [341]
achieved optimum CS of 94–111 MPa with 10% optimum cement
replacement with Class F fine fly ash (FFA).
Poon et al. [342] demonstrated that HSC with CS28 of 80 MPa
can be achieved with w/b of 0.24 and FA content of 45%. Kumar
and Ramana [343] recommended optimum combination of 18%
fly ash and 50%. copper slag to achieve HSC with CS of 60–
70 MPa and 80–90 MPa for 7 and 28 curing days respectively.
Zeyad et al. [344] advocated proper curing which improved
strength and durability of high-strength concrete and the use of
treated and ultrafine POFA to achieve HSC with CS180 100 MPa
at 20, 40 and 60% UPOFA cement replacements. Ungound UPOFA-
HSC was noted to outperform ground-UPOFA HSC. Sharmila and
Dhinakaran [345] recommended optimum 10% ultrafine slag to
increase strength and durability characteristics of HSC and also
observed that ground ultra-fine slag performed better than ultra-
fine slag.
Elchalakani et al. [346] produced HSC with 60% GGBFS and 20%
OPC with low carbon footprint, which gave CS7 and CS28 of 61.8 and
78.5 at 0.38 w=c ratio and 60% GGBFS while Kırca et al. [347] pro-
duced HSC with CS 75 MPa with 40% cement replacement levels
using CAC/GGBFS. Arivalagan [139] observed that strength devel-
opment of GGBS is slow and started at 28 days curing for 20%
cement replacement. Zhu et al. [348] suggested adequate mixing
time to avert internal defects caused by fibers. Bagheri et al.
[349] produced HSC CS 80 MPa using ternary mixes containing
15% slag and 5% SF as well as 15% slag and 7:5% SF. foundry slags
Also, Sharma et al. [350] state that HSC can be produced with
10–45% foundry slags as partial replacement for fine aggregate
and 15% alccofine as cement replacement while Amnadnua et al.
[351] produced HSC of CS as high as 67 MPa at 28 days with 20%
PC GFA with ground fly ash with ground carbide residue), a by-
product of acetylene gas production.
HSC can also be produced using local materials such as RHA.
Ismail and Waliuddin [163] mentioned that HSC can be produced
using locally available materials such as RHA. The optimum RHA
content as cement replacement ranged between 10 and 30%
[30,163,352] which produced HSC with minimum CS of 40–
50 MPa. Also, the optimum grinding condition was 650 °C [30].
Though grinding improved the pozzolanicity of RHA due to its high
specific surface area [142,353], the results obtained by Venkata-
narayanan and Rangaraju [142] showed the lack of the need for
grinding.
Since workability is very important in the production of HSC,
Erdog˘du et al. [354] emphasized good workmanship as well as
inclusion of 10% SF and SP to prevent slump loss while Chandra
and Hardjito [355] suggested increase of FA up to 30% and addition
of calcium carbonate up to 15% to improve workability and
achieved early-age strength development.
Amin and Abu el-Hassan [356] stated that NS improves
mechanical properties of HSC. Khan and Abbass [357] canvassed
for the use of steel fibres and PVA fibres to improve load-bearing
capacity and ductility of HSC beam. Pelisser et al. [358] stated that
recycled tyre rubberized concrete can be utilized to produce HSC
with CS28 50 MPa but requires combinations of chemical treat-
ment with NaOH and addition of 15% SF.
Sarıdemir [359] produced HSC with CS 80 MPa using 15% SF
and combination of 15% SF and 5% ground pumice. In another
research, Amarkhail [137] recommended optimum SF contents of
10 and 15% which achieved highest CS of 70.8 MPa and FS of
69.5 MPa respectively.
8.6. HPC (High performance concrete)
HPC is a special concrete that meet specific performance or
combination of requirements which could be any of the following:
high early-age strength, long-term mechanical properties,
enhanced resistance to chemical attack or enhanced flowability
and low shrinkage. In order to reduce cost-prohibitive trial batches
and optimize the constituent properties, Islam et al. [360] devel-
oped statistical regression model which can be used to predict
CS28 and slump for RHA-incorporated HPC.
Arunachalam and Gopalakrishnan [361] produced HPC which
performed well in both normal and aggressive environments using
25% and 50% Class C fly ash cement replacement in concrete. Also,
Safiuddin et al. [362] manufactured SCHPC (self-compacting high-
performance concrete) with optimum 15% RHA cement replace-
ment and reported that optimum RHA depends on the production
process. Ponikiewski and Gołaszewski [363] observed that grinding
of fly ash has more effect on CS than flexural strength and also pro-
duced HPSCC (high-performance self-compacting concrete) of CS
80 MPa using high-calcium fly ash.
Sabet et al. [364] noted that self-consolidating high perfor-
mance concrete (SCHPC), a hybrid of SCC and HPC, benefits from
and exhibits properties of the two concretes which includes great
flowability and stability, high strength and excellent durability.
With 10 and 20% SF as well as 10 and 20% FA cement replace-
ments, SCHPC with CS28 of 75.5 and 79.5 MPa and 67 and 81 MPa
were produced.
Le and Ludwig [32] reported that SP dosage above SP saturation
dosage induced bleeding and produced HPC with CS56 of approxi-
mately 130 MPa with 20 wt% FA and 20 wt% RHA separately and
recommended that RHA can be utilized as a viscosity modifying
admixture because of its macro-mesoporous nature. Le et al.
[140] reported that RHA should be ground to very fine particle
sizes P 5.7 mm to mitigate ASR. Gonzalez-Corominas et al. [365]
also produced HPC with 30% fly ash and 70% Portland cement using
recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) and recommended steam curing
to reduce the porosity and STS (splitting tensile strength).
Borosnyói [366] recommended 5% cement substitution with SF
in concrete to improve the CS, durability and resistance to acid of
HPC. Büyüköztürk and Lau [367] reported that the key features
of HPC are strength (50 MPa), ductility and durability and recom-
mended the use of short fibres to achieve improved ductility,
higher flexural strength, tensile strength and higher toughness of
HPC. Camões et al. [368] demonstrated that HPC of CS up to
60 MPa can be produced with up to 40% fly ash cement replace-
1082 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-21-320.jpg)
![ment, by eliminating coarse particles with 75 lm sieve while
Chang [369] reported that combination of fly ash and slag can be
utilized to produced HPC with CS 56 MPa with finer pores and
denser microstructure.
Chen et al. [370] reported that the main properties of HPGC
(high performance glass concrete) were determined by aggregate
replacement and w=b ratios. Ling et al. [371] suggested elevated
heat curing for GGBFS and the use of low w=b ratio of 0.35 to
achieve CS7 45 N=mm2
.
HPC has been extensively applied in large infrastructural
projects such as bridges, tunnels in Denmark [372]. For Faro
Bridge, 40 kg=m3
fly ash was used in the pylons and underwater
concrete, 50 kg=m3
of fly ash was utilized in some of the founda-
tions of Alssund Bridge while a combination of cement, fly ash
and microsilica were used in Guldborgsunnd tunnel with a service
life of 100 years.
8.7. GPC (Geopolymer concrete)
Previous studies have investigated the use of geopolymers and
geopolymer concrete in the production of eco-sustainable concrete
blocks, alternative and novel binders for concrete production,
ultra-lightweight concrete and GFRP composites [373–376]. He
et al. [377] reported that the mechanical properties of GP compos-
ites depend on alkalinity, raw material mix ratio, curing duration,
RHA particle size and geopolymerization reactions.
The eco-sustainable block offered advantages such as lower
cost, less energy consumption and less CO2 emission but the CO2
footprint is dependent on the type, concentration and dosage of
the alkali activators utilized [376]. Huiskes et al. [374] reported
that ultra-lightweight GPC has potential applications in load-
bearing concrete and thermal insulating binding material and
requires pre-soaking the LWAs and optimized packing of the GPC
mixture to achieve better stability, compaction and porosity.
Assi et al. [378] recommended addition of 10% Portland cement
to replace fly ash, 60–100% NaOH to binder ratio, heat curing and
w/b ratio of 0.28 to obtain GPC with CS28 of 64.3 MPa. Xie and Kay-
ali [379] recommended polycarboxylate-based SP for Class C fly
ash and naphthalene-based SP for Class F fly ash, even though they
were less effective compared to OPC. Zhang et al. [380] proposed
the utilization of a comprehensive index to evaluate suitability of
fly ashes for generation of high-strength geopolymers. The index
is a function of specific surface area, interparticle volume and glass
chemistry of the fly ash.
The optimal conditions recommended for development of novel
binders made with waste glass and limestone as follows: Ca=SiO2
ratio of 0.5, 40 °C curing temperature, and 9% Na2O [373].
Torres-Carrasco and Puertas [381] demonstrated that waste glass
is an effective alkaline activator in GP Al2O3 preparation as an alter-
native to sodium silicates. Martinez-Lopez and Escalante-Garcia
[382] reported that the factors which influence properties of com-
posite binder comprising waste glass and GGBFS in descending
order were waste glass (%), curing temperature, % Na2O, and alkali
activator ratio. The recommended optimal level of 100% glass,
60 °C and 10% Na2O using Na2CO3 to produce GP with CS28 range
of 69–74 MPa.
Maranan et al. [375] recommended the use of GPC-reinforced
with GFRP bars as well as sand coating which yielded bending
moment capacities 1.2–1.5 times greater than steel-reinforced
GPC and provide mechanical interlock and friction forces adequate
to secure effective bond between GFRP bars and GPC. Kourti et al.
[383] suggested the potential application of geopolymer-glass
composites in pre-cast paving blocks and tiles because of the high
strength and density, low porosity, low water absorption, low
leaching and high acid resistance they exhibit.
The choice of source materials for GP depends on factors such as
availability, cost, type of application and specific demand of end
users while the CS of GP depends on curing time and curing tem-
perature [384]. The authors recommended curing temperature
range of 60–90 and curing time of 24–72 h for strength increase
and optimum molarity of 16 M for NaOH solution and 0.4 fly ash
ratio. Zhou et al. [385] preferred the use of high-Al2O3 fly ash to
low-Al2O3 fly ash in production of geopolymers because of their
superior performance in terms of CS and microstructure. Geopoly-
mers produced with high-Al2O3 fly ash exhibited less mass loss and
higher strength after elevated-temperature curing compared to the
geopolymers produced using low- fly ash. The different content of
Al2O3 results in different reactivity of the raw materials and is
responsible for the differences in morphology and extent of com-
pactness of geopolymer formed [385]. High Al2O3 leads to higher
reactivity, formation of more homogeneous, denser and more com-
pact microstructure, and consequently higher compressive
strength and stability. However, low-Al2O3fly ash can be still be
utilized but requires additional alumino-silicate source which
can be provided by combination of NaOH and Sodium silicate.
The optimal synthesis conditions they recommended for
low-Al2O3 fly ash were curing temperature of 80 °C, Si=Al ratio of
2:1, modulus ratio of 1, additional water/solid ratio of 0.1.
Apart from Al2O3 content, fly ash has been classified into two
types, namely Class F and Class C based on their source, composi-
tion and strength development [386] as shown in Table 4. This
classification should guide proper selection of fly ash for various
targeted applications.
9. Analytical and numerical modelling of green concrete
Proper experimental investigation is essential for reliable and
accurate analytical and numerical modelling of green concrete
and its properties. The three methods, experimental, analytical
and numerical, should be viewed as complementary means to
comprehensively understand, analyze and predict the behavior/
response of both green concrete and ordinary concrete within
the confines of available limited literatures. It must be borne in
mind that each of the three methods presents peculiar advantages
as well as drawbacks and when in combination overcomes some of
the inherent limitations of individual methods. Extensive experi-
mental investigation is expensive, time-consuming and energy
intensive and requires proper planning to achieve best results. In
order to save time and costs, experiments should be combined
with any other available approaches to optimize experimental
results.
Šejnoha et al. [387] combined experimental program with ANN
and ATENA finite element for analyzing MOE, fracture energy and
tensile strength of fly-ash based concrete. Nie et al. [388] simulated
the pozzolanic and hydration reaction of fly ash concrete and their
decomposition under sulphate attack using Crack-Nicholson equa-
tion. Nguyen et al. [389] implemented the 3D finite element model
of GPC in ABAQUS.
Gao et al. [269] made us of backscattered electron image anal-
ysis and HYMOSTRUC model to investigate the ITZ microstructure
of ternary blended cement comprising OPC, blast furnace slag and
filler. Nanoindentation technique, based on grid indentation
methodology, in conjunction with deconvolution analysis, was uti-
lized by Zadeh and Bobko [390] for predicting response of individ-
ual phase of LWAC (lightweight aggregate concrete) containing fly
ash and GGBFS).
Utilized the chemical-hydration analytical model for evaluating
the CS, Ca(OH)2 contents, chemically bound water and porosity
properties of high-calcium fly ash concrete at different composi-
tion and ages. A similar approach was also used by Wang and Park
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1083](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-22-320.jpg)
![[391] for analyzing CS development of fly ash concrete. Compres-
sive stress-strain model was utilized by [56] for predicting strain
and CS of heat-cured low-calcium GPC. Golewski et al. [392] for-
mulated and implemented 3D CSS (compact shear specimen)
numerical model in ABAQUS to study the fracture propagation in
concrete composite using XFEM.
Analytical methods require some essential information before it
can be used and accurate knowledge of the properties of the con-
stituent and green concrete [304]. Numerical methods are compu-
tationally intensive and use of appropriate law that governs the
properties of the constituent of green concrete and the applied
loading conditions. In addition, successful applications of numeri-
cal methods to evaluate green concrete properties are scarce in
literature.
10. Potential benefits of green concrete in early project
completion and cost savings
According to Hong Kong Design Code, the lowest grade of con-
crete for use in reinforced concrete is C20 (20 MPa). For construc-
tion of multi-storey, minimum concrete grade of 25 MPa is often
required and utilized [393]. For high-rise buildings, HSC are often
utilized with concrete strength ranging from 55.1 to 131 MPa
[393,394]. During concrete construction projects, allowance of 28
curing days is given for concrete works including columns, slabs
and beams to develop sufficient strength in compliance with the
concrete/project design requirements. For high-rise buildings,
sometimes, up to a year or more is spent before the lower floors
are loaded which delays project completion [395]. This construc-
tion delay was also highlighted by Johari et al. [396] who reported
delay in full loading of many construction works after several
months of casting.
With early compressive strength development of green con-
crete which range from 30.58-122 MPa and 29.7–162 MPa for 3
and 7 days of curing as displayed in Table 5, the curing waiting
time is significantly reduced. The pozzolanic properties of the
SCM in the green concrete promote early strength development
which has the potential to facilitate early project completion. Com-
pared to traditional project construction, the project completion
time can be reduced by at least 50% with the use of green concrete
of high early strength such as UHPC, HSC and advanced construc-
tion technology via construction automation. Automation of green
concrete construction, as a result of improved workability and
flowability, leads to improvement in labour productivity, safer-
working environment and improved quality of construction. Sav-
ings in construction time and labour cost was reported by [397]
through the utilization of green SCC (self-consolidation concrete)
with 50% fly ash replacement of cement.
Likewise, the improved pumpability of green concrete has the
potential to reduce labour requirements for construction. This find-
ing was corroborated by [395] who reported significant reduction
in labour requirements and material cost. Cost savings of $3, 824,
007 was also reported by Ahmad and Shah [398] with the use of
HSC of 84 MPa compared to conventional concrete of 28 MPa. In
addition, the excellent workability of green concrete helps to over-
come the difficulties often encountered in conventional concrete
during construction of heavily reinforced structures [399]. Utiliza-
tion of green concrete in precast concrete elements has the poten-
tial to also improve manpower savings [400] and likewise time
savings through the use of fast-curing methods such as steam
hot curing and autoclaving, which achieve HSC within two curing
days [401,402]. As a result of reduced manpower during concrete
construction, green concrete can be combined with lean construc-
tion methods to deliver projects on-time and to-budget. Integra-
tion of lean construction with sustainable construction was also
supported by [403].
Retardation experienced in green concrete reported by several
authors [61,404,405] was as a result of inadequate water which
leads to self-dessication, improper mix proportioning and impro-
per mixing of green concrete mixtures, poor SCM particle prepara-
tion and improper curing methods. All these shortcomings are
linked to inadequate understanding of the roles of SCMs, SCM type
and content, chemical admixtures and influence of curing temper-
ature. These shortcomings are overcomed as we learn from past
experiments through data mining and assimilation. The retarda-
tion effects of GGBS and FA, which is marked by moderate stimu-
lation of hydration in GGBS and weak hydration in FA at early
ages, were attributed to the physico-chemical effects of FA [404].
On the other hand, the retardation effects were attributed to the
nature and condition of the surfaces of the FA [406] while Thomas
[61] attributed it to the low calcium content of FA. Thomas [61]
also mentioned that concrete setting and invariably concrete
strength development are affected by composition and quantity
of SCM, type and amount of cement, w/cm ratio (water-
cementitious materials ratio), type and amount of chemical admix-
tures and concrete temperature.
Furthermore, retardation effects were also reported by some
authors in concrete and mortars incorporating RHA [23,102]. The
retardation effects and strength development observed at 3 and
7 days was found to correlate linearly with the total heat released
expressed as volume of available water and limited by calcium
hydroxide (CH) availability [23]. On the other hand, the coarse nat-
ure of the untreated RHA was found to affect the strength develop-
ment of mortar [407]. However, [27] reported that RHA is a
promising SCM which retains its reactivity potential and resilience
despite the effects of calcinations temperature, grinding, chemical
pre-treatment and manufacturing process variability.
For WG, retardation is caused by smooth surface of WG parti-
cles which cause weak interface with the glass mortar system
[408], lower rate of hydration, higher effective water-cement ratio
and neglible water absorption [409], coarse grain size [410] and
incomplete adhesion between WG and cement paste as well as
excessive cement replacement [47,411].
In order to avoid the retardation effects in WGC, finer WG par-
ticle sizes 38 lm was recommended by Shao et al. [412], particle
sizes 0.3 mm was recommended by Shayan and Xu [413] while
Table 4
Differences between Class F and Class C fly ashes [62].
Class F fly ash Class C fly ash
Source Anthracite and
bituminous coal
Lignite and sub-
bituminous coal
Composition Aluminium silicate glass
crystalline quartz,
hematite magnetite and
mullite
Calcium-alumino-
silicate glass, hematite
magnetite and mullite
Pozzolanicity Less pozzolanic
properties
Has higher
pozzolanicity
Cementing agent
requirement
Needs cementing agents
such as lime or alkali
Does not need
activation
Lime content (%) 20% lime (Cao) 20%
Early-age strength Early-age properties
slightly lower
Greater early-age
strength
Heat of hydration Produces less heat of
hydration
Produces more heat of
hydration
Use in concrete Used for high-volume fly
ash concrete
Used for low-volume
fly ash concrete
Applications Structural concrete, high-
performance concrete
and concrete exposed to
sulphate environments
Residential
constructions and
prohibited for high
sulphate
environments
1084 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-23-320.jpg)
![Table 5
Compressive strength of different types of green concrete and the effects of the SCM utilized.
Author(s) W/SCM W/C CS (MPa) Type of concrete Remarks
3 7 14 28
Zhang et al. [435] 0.30 0.33 77.9 94.1 RHAC Reduction in porosity width of interfacial transition zone (ITZ)
Chao-Lung et al. [436] 0.35 0.44 38 47 52 60 RHAC (20% RHA) Addition of ground RHA improved concrete impermeability and strength
efficiency of cement
Ismail and Waliuddin [163] 0.32 0.4
0
46.7 56 70.2 RHAC (20% RHA) Slump (45 mm). High strength concrete was obtained using locally available
RHA. For successful application of RHAC, workability needs to be different
from the control
Mahmud et al. [437] 0.36 0.40 45.1 52.9 66.7 RHAC (20%RHA) Strength improvement, reduction of drying shrinkage and durability
improvement were observed
de Sensale [438] 0.32 44.3 54.8 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (48 mm). RHA exhibited filler and pozzolanic functions. Residual RHA
gave higher early age strength while controlled incinerated achieved better
late-age strength
Cordeiro et al. [439] 0.35 0.44 53–
54
70 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (20 mm). Reduced chloride-ion penetrability. Grinding time should
be limited to 120 mins for better pozzolanic properties
Ganesan et al. [30] 0.53 29.7 39.3 42.5 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (48 mm). Improved compressive strength, increased water
absorption, reduction of chloride-ion diffusion and permeability and
sorptivity
Yu et al. [440] 0.20 44 65 HVFAC Slump was180-200 mm. Suitable for general construction. 60% reduction in
embodied concrete energy, 70% reduction in CO2 emission 15% reduction
in material cost
Radlinski and Olek [441] 32 42 54 FAC (20% FA + 5% SF) Ternary blended cement concrete. Synergistic effects noted from 7 days.
Lower SG of FA SF promoted low w/b.
Qiang et al. [442] 0.35 0.41 46 60 78 FA HSC Improved flowability, late-age strength decreased autogenous shrinkage
reduction of chloride-ion permeability
Qiang et al. [442] 0.25 0.29 68 86 101 FA HSC Improved early-age CS at low w/b ratio.
Alaka and Oyedele [131] 0.28 0.56 24.7 37.8 HVFAC (50% FA + 4% SP) SP promoted lower-binder ratios with good workability. Not suitable for
concrete requiring abrasion resistanceAlaka and Oyedele [131] 0.31 0.62 21.6 32.6 HVFAC (50% FA + 4% SP)
Shaikh and Supit [443] 0.4 0.67 14 17 27 FAC (32% FA + 8%UFFA) Reduction of rebar corrosion
Shen et al. [444] 0.32 0.46 30.58 43.07 52.7 62.6 GGBS + FA High strength concrete at early age
Mehta et al. [445] 64.4 Fly-ash based GPC High early-age strength development
Zhang et al. [47] 0.24 0.33 68 92 121 SFC (10%) Ternary blended cement concrete. Improved interface bond between cement
paste and aggregate. Proper mixing is required to prevent SF agglomeration
Zhang et al. [47] 0.30 0.33 58 75 103 SFC (10%SF) Ternary blended cement concrete. Increased w/b ratio reduced the CS
Youm et al. [330] 0.28 0.30 60 68 74.2 SFC (7%SF) Normal-weight aggregate concrete (NWAC). Increased CS was noted
Youm et al. [330] 0.26 0.28 62 64 72.3 SFC (7%SF) Lightweight agg. Concrete. Internal curing effects reduced LWAC chloride-
ion permeability. Type of aggregate and chemical composition of cement
paste influence durability
Radlinski and Olek [441] 39 50 58 SFC (SF only) Binary cement concrete. CS lower compared to ternary cement concrete
Thang et al. [446] 0.16 92 132 158 UHPC (SF 10%+ GGBS 20%) High early-age strength development cured at room temp
Thang et al. [446] 0.16 122 150 164 UHPC (SF 10%+ GGBS20 %) Improved high early-age strength development
Yazıcı et al. [271] 0.21 162 177 Reactive powder concrete (SF
GGBS)
Met the requirements to be used as UHPC. Reduction of corrosion risk and
risk of thermal cracking
Yazıcı et al. [271] 0.21 204–243 Reactive powder concrete (SF
GGBS-Autoclaved and steam-
cured for 2 days)
Autoclave curing and steam curing reduced unreacted SCM which improved
compressive strength. High temperature favours strength development of
GGBFS
Dehghan et al. [447] 0.43 0.45 34 38 WGC (Recycled GFRP) Recycled GFRP did not cause ASR. Exhibited pozzolanic behaviour
Gesoglu et al. [448] 0.20 128 154 UHPC (Micro-glass + micro steel
fibre)
Improvement in fracture energy, modulus of elasticity and ductility
Harbec et al. [265] 0.35 54.5 59.8 HPC (10% Glass fibre replacement
of cement)
Produced comparable strength to SF. Glass fibre fume (GF) reduced ASR
expansion and ITZ. Exhibited pozzolanic properties and is a good
replacement for SF
Kushartomo et al. [449] 0.14 0.2 136 RPC (Glass powder-20%) Similar to SF in terms of performance after steam curing for 10–12 h at 95 °C
and 14 days curing age. It is a good replacement for quartz powder and silica
fume
(continued on next page)
K.M.Liewetal./ConstructionandBuildingMaterials156(2017)1063–10951085](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-24-320.jpg)
![600 lm particle was advocated by Lee et al. [414]. Also, valoriza-
tion of WG into fine particles was suggested by Omran and Tagnit-
Hamou [415] to avoid retardation effects of WG in concrete.
In terms of economic benefits, GPC was reported to be 25%
cheaper compared to Portland cement concrete [416]. Also, esti-
mated cement cost savings of 31:5% and overall construction cost
savings of 14:2% was obtained when 25% RHA was used to replace
cement [249].
11. Future trends in production and application of green
concrete
Green concrete can be used in blocks, floor screeding underlays
and façade panels [417]. Green concrete is foreseen to be applied
more in pre-fabricated construction technology because it is more
environmentally friendly than traditional cast-in-situ concrete
technology [418].
GGBFS-based green concrete is used in mass concreting to limit
and control temperature rise because of its lower heat generation
compared to OPC [419]. UHSC is currently limited to offshore
and marine structures, industrial floors, pavements and barriers
and future applications are foreseen in infrastructure projects
requiring slender structural members such as skyscrapers. Another
future trend is the utilization of Green UHSC and Green UHPC in
CFST composite columns in high-rise buildings and other struc-
tures with heavy axial loadings.
Green concrete is also foreseen to be utilized in commercial
production of precast concrete panels, terrazzo tiles, concrete
masonry blocks and paving stones [420]. Green UHSC is also appli-
cable in prestressed and precast concrete members for industrial
and nuclear storage facilities and in combination with steel fibres
can be used to eliminate passive reinforcements [292].
Another trend now is to simplify the production (curing) pro-
cesses of UHPC at a reduced cost by replacement of the costly com-
ponents such as cement, steel fibres and silica powder [421].
UHPFRC made with silica sand (500 lm maximum size), GGBFS
and steel fibres (3% and 13 mm length) can also be used to
strengthen existing RC beams [422].
LWC is increasingly utilized in residential and office buildings to
achieve reduced load, improved heat and sound adsorption in par-
titions and wall [423]. LWC reinforced with polymer fibres can be
utilized in sidewalk concrete slabs, in bridge elements such as
decks, girders, piers, parking garages as well as offshore platforms,
thermal and acoustic insulating lightweight screeds above struc-
tural floors [317,424,425].
LWAC is also used in high-rise buildings, long span bridges,
buildings with poor foundation construction and floating and off-
shore structures as well as external and internal walls, panels, roof-
ing decks and floors [322,326]. Optimized lightweight UHPC-HSS
can also be utilized in deck panels of movable bridge [426].
Yun-Ming et al. [427] reported the use of clay-based GP in form
of geopolymer binders and pyraments in precast and prestressed
concrete, building thermal insulation, foundry, production of high
quality ceramic tiles and bricks, aircraft composites and cabin inte-
riors and lightweight concrete.
Geopolymers can also be used in the solidification and immobi-
lization of heavy metal wastes [428]. Maranan et al. [429] reported
that GFRP-RGC system can be used in compression members
where corrosion resistance, material greenness, durability, electro-
magnetic transparency and sustainability are required. MK-based
GP direct coating of reinforcements in aggressive marine environ-
ments was recommended because it exhibited low permeability,
excellent adhesion and anticorrosive properties [430].
In summary, the future trends in applications of green concrete
is diverse and more researches are required to encourage its usage.
Table5(continued)
Author(s)W/SCMW/CCS(MPa)TypeofconcreteRemarks
371428
Harbietal.[450]3444WGmortar(5%GP+25%MK)Promotedshrinkagereduction
SolimanandTagnit-Hamou
[401]
0.190.24125175UHPC(70%SF+30%WG:Normal
curing)
Improveddispersionbysuperplasticizer,enhancedparticleinterlockingand
compressivestrength
SolimanandTagnit-Hamou
[401]
0.190.24234(2days)UHPC(70%SF+30%WG:steamhot
curing)
Steamhotcuringat90°Cfor48hat100%RHacceleratedthepozzolanic
reactionsandfacilitatedearly-strengthdevelopment
SolimanandTagnit-Hamou
[402]
171(Normalcuring-
91days);196(Steam
curing-2days)
UHPC(50%Glasssand+(50%
Quartzsand)
DidnotexhibitASRbecauseofloww/bratio.Improvedhighstrengthafter
normalandsteamcuringfor2days
1086 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-25-320.jpg)
![12. Current challenges and obstacles
Some obstacles faced in green concrete applications in the con-
struction include difficulties in compliance with regulatory stan-
dards such as minimum clinker concrete levels and chemical
composition of cements, lack of or insufficient durability data of
spanning up to 20 years or more, differentiation of green concrete
for different applications, more research development to pro-
mote better understanding of the chemistry of green concrete
[386]. This necessitates the revision of various construction regula-
tory codes to make them more environmentally friendly and
encourage adoption of green concrete.
Guidelines and affordable technologies for efficient processing
and production of green concrete are required alongside perfor-
mance data to justify and inform changes in construction codes
and standards [431]. Field data on green concrete applications
are limited. Field applications of green concrete in various struc-
tural forms are required alongside standardization to encourage
to generate long-term data and guide their applications [432]. Also,
more durability data on shrinkage, creep, abrasion and ASR are
needed [433].
Roy [434] pointed out the following challenges such as develop-
ment of standards to gain widespread acceptance and deployment,
development of database which can guide their manufacturing and
field deployment. Others mentioned include improved under-
standing of the reaction mechanism of green concrete, improved
characterization of different complex green concrete combinations
in liquid and solid phases, and effects of different beneficiation
parameters of the raw materials on green concrete performance.
Appropriate hands-on training and re-training should be given
to built-environment professionals to create more awareness
about the benefits of green concrete. This will encourage the diffu-
sion of green concrete practices in the construction industries.
Likewise, challenges faced in its adoption by the construction
and consulting companies should be addressed.
In addition, new and affordable activators are required to
encourage sustainable development and deployment of green con-
crete in field applications. Cheap and affordable characterization
techniques are also required especially for developing countries
where cost of research and development is not affordable. Incen-
tives should also be given to construction companies, Universities
and research institutes to pioneer development and application of
green concrete in their infrastructural projects.
Furthermore, research clusters for green concrete should be cre-
ated to encourage continuous innovation of green concrete prod-
ucts and construction practices. Indigenous manufacturing
methods should be encouraged to produce cheap green concrete
products and reduce over-dependence on expensive imported
technologies.
Furthermore, efforts to encourage green concrete in construc-
tion should be co-ordinated to avoid duplication of research, fast-
track green concrete applications and development of best prac-
tices to entrench it in the construction industry on a sustainable
basis.
13. Conclusion
Green concrete comes in various forms such as high-strength
concrete, ultra-high performance concrete, ultra-high strength
concrete, self-consolidated concrete, high-performance concrete,
lightweight concrete, high-volume fly ash concrete and geopoly-
mer concrete. The approaches that would be adopted to encourage
green concrete in construction would be different in each country
because of differences in development priorities, capacity and skill
level of local construction industry.
Utilization of waste materials and unconventional, alternative
materials as SCM and aggregates in green concrete is one of the
most effective, economic, innovative and sustainable methods to
improve the performance of concrete structures. Utilization of
green concrete in large-scale infrastructure projects globally
should be promoted.
In order to encourage adoption of green concrete in construc-
tion, appropriate standards are urgently required as well as
cross-disciplinary collaborations among construction stakeholders.
In addition, more demonstration projects and further research and
developments for the development of alternative binders from
green materials to reduce the need for OPC are required. Green
concrete is highly recommended for construction industry owing
to its environmental, technical and economic benefits.
From our literature review, the following orders of ranking are
hereby proposed to guide selection of SCM materials for target
green concrete applications:
i. Resistance to chloride penetration: GGBS RHA SF
FA WG
ii. ASR mitigation: SF FA CRHA GGBS WG RRHA
iii. CS performance at elevated temperature: FA GGBS SF
iv. Resistance to sulphate attack: WG SF GGBS FA RHA.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge UGC-Postgraduate Stu-
dentship Hong Kong Government Award/funding given to Sojobi
A.O. towards his PhD programme in the Department of Architec-
ture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong
Kong, China. Sojobi A.O. appreciates the guidance and support of
colleagues towards the writing of this manuscript. The authors
appreciate the constructive feedback from the reviewers which
led to significant improvement of this manuscript.
References
[1] S. Kabir, A. Al-Shayeb, I.M. Khan, Recycled construction debris as concrete
aggregate for sustainable construction materials, Procedia Eng. 145 (2016)
1518–1525.
[2] A. Mehta, R. Siddique, An overview of geopolymers derived from industrial
by-products, Constr. Build. Mater. 127 (2016) 183–198.
[3] J.K. Prusty, S.K. Patro, S. Basarkar, Concrete using agro-waste as fine aggregate
for sustainable built environment–A review, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 5
(2) (2016) 312–333.
[4] A.M. Rashad, D.M. Sadek, An investigation on Portland cement replaced by
high-volume GGBS pastes modified with micro-sized metakaolin subjected to
elevated temperatures, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. (2016).
[5] A.O. Sojobi, Evaluation of the performance of eco-friendly lightweight
interlocking concrete paving units incorporating sawdust wastes and
laterite, Cogent Eng. 3 (1) (2016) 1255168.
[6] R. Jin, Q. Chen, An investigation of current status of ‘‘green” concrete in the
construction industry, 49th ASC Annual International Conference
Proceedings, 2013.
[7] A. Baikerikar, A Review on Green Concrete, J. Emerging Technol. Innovative
Res. 1 (6) (2014) 472–474.
[8] O.M. Jensen, P.F. Hansen, Autogenous deformation and RH-change in
perspective, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (12) (2001) 1859–1865.
[9] D. Thorpe, Y. Zhuge, Advantages and disadvantages in using permeable
concrete pavement as a pavement construction material, Assoc. Res. Constr.
Manage. 6 (8) (2010) 1341–1350.
[10] R. Woodward, N. Duffy, Cement and concrete flow analysis in a rapidly
expanding economy: Ireland as a case study, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 55 (4)
(2011) 448–455.
[11] M.K. Dash, S.K. Patro, A.K. Rath, Sustainable use of industrial-waste as partial
replacement of fine aggregate for preparation of concrete–A review, Int. J.
Sustainable Built Environ. 5 (2) (2016) 484–516.
[12] J.H. Wesseling, A. van der Vooren, Lock-in of mature innovation systems, The
transformation toward clean concrete in the Netherlands, Lund University,
CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning
Economy, 2016.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1087](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-26-320.jpg)
![[13] M.S. Imbabi, C. Carrigan, S. McKenna, Trends and developments in green
cement and concrete technology, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 1 (2) (2012)
194–216.
[14] C. Hu, Y. Han, Y. Gao, Y. Zhang, Z. Li, Property investigation of calcium–
silicate–hydrate (C–S–H) gel in cementitious composites, Mater. Charact. 95
(2014) 129–139.
[15] S.A. Saad, M.F. Nuruddin, N. Shafiq, M. Ali, The Effect of Incineration
Temperature to the Chemical and Physical Properties of Ultrafine Treated
Rice Husk Ash (UFTRHA) as Supplementary Cementing Material (SCM),
Procedia Eng. 148 (2016) 163–167.
[16] G. Cordeiro, R. Toledo Filho, L. Tavares, E. Fairbairn, Experimental
characterization of binary and ternary blended-cement concretes
containing ultrafine residual rice husk and sugar cane bagasse ashes,
Constr. Build. Mater. 29 (2012) 641–646.
[17] C.-L. Hwang, T.-P. Huynh, Effect of alkali-activator and rice husk ash content
on strength development of fly ash and residual rice husk ash-based
geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 1–9.
[18] S.M. Kazmi, S. Abbas, M.A. Saleem, M.J. Munir, A. Khitab, Manufacturing of
sustainable clay bricks: Utilization of waste sugarcane bagasse and rice husk
ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 120 (2016) 29–41.
[19] K. Kunchariyakun, S. Asavapisit, K. Sombatsompop, Properties of autoclaved
aerated concrete incorporating rice husk ash as partial replacement for fine
aggregate, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 11–16.
[20] G. Sua-iam, P. Sokrai, N. Makul, Novel ternary blends of Type 1 Portland
cement, residual rice husk ash, and limestone powder to improve the
properties of self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016)
1028–1034.
[21] S. Hesami, S. Ahmadi, M. Nematzadeh, Effects of rice husk ash and fiber on
mechanical properties of pervious concrete pavement, Constr. Build. Mater.
53 (2014) 680–691.
[22] E. Mohseni, F. Naseri, R. Amjadi, M.M. Khotbehsara, M.M. Ranjbar,
Microstructure and durability properties of cement mortars containing
nano-TiO2 and rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 656–664.
[23] F. Zunino, M. Lopez, Decoupling the physical and chemical effects of
supplementary cementitious materials on strength and permeability: a
multi-level approach, Cement Concr. Compos. 65 (2016) 19–28.
[24] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, L.M. Tavares, E.d.M.R. Fairbairn, S. Hempel,
Influence of particle size and specific surface area on the pozzolanic activity
of residual rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 33 (5) (2011) 529–534.
[25] G.A. Habeeb, H.B. Mahmud, Study on properties of rice husk ash and its use as
cement replacement material, Mater. Res. 13 (2) (2010) 185–190.
[26] A.N. Givi, S.A. Rashid, F.N.A. Aziz, M.A.M. Salleh, Assessment of the effects of
rice husk ash particle size on strength, water permeability and workability of
binary blended concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (11) (2010) 2145–2150.
[27] F. Zunino, M. Lopez, A methodology for assessing the chemical and physical
potential of industrially sourced rice husk ash on strength development and
early-age hydration of cement paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 149 (2017) 869–
881.
[28] M. Cyr, P. Lawrence, E. Ringot, Mineral admixtures in mortars: quantification
of the physical effects of inert materials on short-term hydration, Cement
Concr. Res. 35 (4) (2005) 719–730.
[29] M. Cyr, P. Lawrence, E. Ringot, Efficiency of mineral admixtures in mortars:
quantification of the physical and chemical effects of fine admixtures in
relation with compressive strength, Cement Concr. Res. 36 (2) (2006) 264–
277.
[30] K. Ganesan, K. Rajagopal, K. Thangavel, Rice husk ash blended cement:
assessment of optimal level of replacement for strength and permeability
properties of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (8) (2008) 1675–1683.
[31] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, L.M. Tavares, E.D.M.R. Fairbairn, Ultrafine
grinding of sugar cane bagasse ash for application as pozzolanic admixture in
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 39 (2) (2009) 110–115.
[32] H.T. Le, H.-M. Ludwig, Effect of rice husk ash and other mineral admixtures on
properties of self-compacting high performance concrete, Mater. Des. 89
(2016) 156–166.
[33] E. Nimwinya, W. Arjharn, S. Horpibulsuk, T. Phoo-Ngernkham, A.
Poowancum, A sustainable calcined water treatment sludge and rice husk
ash geopolymer, J. Cleaner Prod. 119 (2016) 128–134.
[34] A. Gastaldini, M. Da Silva, F. Zamberlan, C.M. Neto, Total shrinkage, chloride
penetration, and compressive strength of concretes that contain clear-colored
rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 369–377.
[35] M. Jamil, A. Kaish, S.N. Raman, M.F.M. Zain, Pozzolanic contribution of rice
husk ash in cementitious system, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 588–593.
[36] D. Salazar-Carreño, R.G. García-Cáceres, O.O. Ortiz-Rodríguez, Laboratory
processing of Colombian rice husk for obtaining amorphous silica as concrete
supplementary cementing material, Constr. Build. Mater. 96 (2015) 65–75.
[37] Ö. Çakır, Ö.Ö. Sofyanlı, Influence of silica fume on mechanical and physical
properties of recycled aggregate concrete, HBRC J. 11 (2) (2015) 157–166.
[38] P. Choi, J.H. Yeon, K.-K. Yun, Air-void structure, strength, and permeability of
wet-mix shotcrete before and after shotcreting operation: The influences of
silica fume and air-entraining agent, Cement Concr. Compos. 70 (2016) 69–
77.
[39] M. Jalal, A. Pouladkhan, O.F. Harandi, D. Jafari, Comparative study on effects of
Class F fly ash, nano silica and silica fume on properties of high performance
self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 90–104.
[40] M. Mastali, A. Dalvand, Use of silica fume and recycled steel fibers in self-
compacting concrete (SCC), Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 196–209.
[41] E. Papa, V. Medri, D. Kpogbemabou, V. Morinière, J. Laumonier, A. Vaccari, S.
Rossignol, Porosity and insulating properties of silica-fume based foams,
Energy Build. 131 (2016) 223–232.
[42] A. Sadrmomtazi, J. Sobhani, M. Mirgozar, M. Najimi, Properties of multi-
strength grade EPS concrete containing silica fume and rice husk ash, Constr.
Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 211–219.
[43] M.E.-S.I. Saraya, Study physico-chemical properties of blended cements
containing fixed amount of silica fume, blast furnace slag, basalt and
limestone, a comparative study, Constr. Build. Mater. 72 (2014) 104–112.
[44] A. Tamimi, N.M. Hassan, K. Fattah, A. Talachi, Performance of cementitious
materials produced by incorporating surface treated multiwall carbon
nanotubes and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 934–945.
[45] Z. Li, H.K. Venkata, P.R. Rangaraju, Influence of silica flour–silica fume
combination on the properties of high performance cementitious mixtures at
ambient temperature curing, Constr. Build. Mater. 100 (2015) 225–233.
[46] J. Sobhani, M. Najimi, Electrochemical impedance behavior and transport
properties of silica fume contained concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013)
910–918.
[47] Z. Zhang, B. Zhang, P. Yan, Comparative study of effect of raw and densified
silica fume in the paste, mortar and concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 105 (2016)
82–93.
[48] R. Khatri, V. Sirivivatnanon, W. Gross, Effect of different supplementary
cementitious materials on mechanical properties of high performance
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (1) (1995) 209–220.
[49] M. Buil, P. Acker, Creep of a silica fume concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 15 (3)
(1985) 463–466.
[50] F. De Larrard, J.-L. Bostvironnois, On the long–term strength losses of silica–
fume high–strength concretes, Mag. Concr. Res. 43 (155) (1991) 109–119.
[51] P. Sandberg, Chloride initiated reinforcement corrosion in marine concrete,
Rep. TVBM 1015 (1998).
[52] R. Chen, Y. Li, R. Xiang, S. Li, Effect of particle size of fly ash on the properties
of lightweight insulation materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 120–126.
[53] N. Chousidis, I. Ioannou, E. Rakanta, C. Koutsodontis, G. Batis, Effect of fly ash
chemical composition on the reinforcement corrosion, thermal diffusion and
strength of blended cement concretes, Constr. Build. Mater. 126 (2016) 86–
97.
[54] W.-J. Fan, X.-Y. Wang, K.-B. Park, Evaluation of the chemical and mechanical
properties of hardening high-calcium fly ash blended concrete, Materials 8
(9) (2015) 5933–5952.
[55] M.Z.N. Khan, Y. Hao, H. Hao, Synthesis of high strength ambient cured
geopolymer composite by using low calcium fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 125
(2016) 809–820.
[56] A. Noushini, F. Aslani, A. Castel, R.I. Gilbert, B. Uy, S. Foster, Compressive
stress-strain model for low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer and
heat-cured Portland cement concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 73 (2016)
136–146.
[57] P. Shafigh, M.A. Nomeli, U.J. Alengaram, H.B. Mahmud, M.Z. Jumaat,
Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing
limestone powder and high volume fly ash, J. Cleaner Prod. 135 (2016)
148–157.
[58] H. Tian, Y. Zhang, L. Ye, C. Yang, Mechanical behaviours of green hybrid fibre-
reinforced cementitious composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 95 (2015) 152–163.
[59] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, H.A. Salem, Effect of cement addition, solution
resting time and curing characteristics on fly ash based geopolymer concrete
performance, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 581–593.
[60] Y. Park, A. Abolmaali, Y.H. Kim, M. Ghahremannejad, Compressive strength of
fly ash-based geopolymer concrete with crumb rubber partially replacing
sand, Constr. Build. Mater. 118 (2016) 43–51.
[61] M. Thomas, Optimizing the use of fly ash in concrete, Portland Cement
Association Skokie, IL, USA2007.
[62] T.C. Madhavi, L.S. Raju, D. Mathur, Durabilty and strength properties of high
volume fly ash concrete, J. Civil Eng. Res. 4 (2A) (2014) 7–11.
[63] R. Kurad, J.D. Silvestre, J. de Brito, H. Ahmed, Effect of incorporation of high
volume of recycled concrete aggregates and fly ash on the strength and global
warming potential of concrete, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017).
[64] S. Wang, L. Baxter, Comprehensive study of biomass fly ash in concrete:
Strength, microscopy, kinetics and durability, Fuel Process. Technol. 88 (11)
(2007) 1165–1170.
[65] K. Neupane, Fly ash and GGBFS based powder-activated geopolymer binders:
A viable sustainable alternative of portland cement in concrete industry,
Mech. Mater. 103 (2016) 110–122.
[66] N. Rakhimova, R. Rakhimov, Individual and combined effects of Portland
cement-based hydrated mortar components on alkali-activated slag cement,
Constr. Build. Mater. 73 (2014) 515–522.
[67] Ö. Çakır, F. Aköz, Effect of curing conditions on the mortars with and without
GGBFS, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (3) (2008) 308–314.
[68] E. Özbay, M. Erdemir, H._I. Durmusß, Utilization and efficiency of ground
granulated blast furnace slag on concrete properties–A review, Constr. Build.
Mater. 105 (2016) 423–434.
[69] S. Chidiac, D. Panesar, Evolution of mechanical properties of concrete
containing ground granulated blast furnace slag and effects on the scaling
resistance test at 28 days, Cement Concr. Compos. 30 (2) (2008) 63–71.
1088 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-27-320.jpg)
![[70] M. Shariq, J. Prasad, A. Masood, Effect of GGBFS on time dependent
compressive strength of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (8) (2010) 1469–
1478.
[71] H.J. Yim, J.H. Kim, S.H. Han, H.-G. Kwak, Influence of Portland cement and
ground-granulated blast-furnace slag on bleeding of fresh mix, Constr. Build.
Mater. 80 (2015) 132–140.
[72] J. Bijen, Durability aspects of the King Fahd causeway, Concrete in hot
climates, Proceedings OF the third international conference held by Rilem
(The international union of testing and research laboratories for materials
and testing), September 21–25, 1992, Torquay, England, 1992.
[73] J. Wiebenga, Durability of concrete structures along the North Sea coast of the
Netherlands, Spec. Publ. 65 (1980) 437–452.
[74] J. Bijen, Benefits of slag and fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (5) (1996) 309–
314.
[75] P. Munoz, O. Morales, G. Letelier, H. Mendivil, Fired clay bricks made by
adding wastes: assessment of the impact on physical, mechanical and
thermal properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 241–252.
[76] R.M. Novais, G. Ascensão, M. Seabra, J. Labrincha, Waste glass from end-of-life
fluorescent lamps as raw material in geopolymers, Waste Manage. 52 (2016)
245–255.
[77] X. Wang, D. Feng, B. Zhang, Z. Li, C. Li, Y. Zhu, Effect of KNO3 on the
microstruture and physical properties of glass foam from solid waste glass
and SiC powder, Mater. Lett. 169 (2016) 21–23.
[78] Y.-L. Wei, S.-H. Cheng, G.-W. Ko, Effect of waste glass addition on lightweight
aggregates prepared from F-class coal fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016)
773–782.
[79] R. Yu, D. van Onna, P. Spiesz, Q. Yu, H. Brouwers, Development of ultra-
lightweight fibre reinforced concrete applying expanded waste glass, J.
Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 690–701.
[80] J.L. Calmon, A.S. Sauer, G.L. Vieira, J.E.S.L. Teixeira, Effects of windshield waste
glass on the properties of structural repair mortars, Cement Concr. Compos.
53 (2014) 88–96.
[81] A. Jamshidi, K. Kurumisawa, T. Nawa, T. Igarashi, Performance of pavements
incorporating waste glass: the current state of the art, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 64 (2016) 211–236.
[82] J.M. Juoi, D. Arudra, Z.M. Rosli, K. Hussain, A.J. Jaafar, Microstructural
properties of glass composite material made from incinerated scheduled
waste slag and soda lime silicate (SLS) waste glass, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 367
(2013) 8–13.
[83] J. Pastor, L. García, S. Quintana, J. Peña, Glass reinforced concrete panels
containing recycled tyres: evaluation of the acoustic properties of for their
use as sound barriers, Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 541–549.
[84] J. Kim, J.-H. Moon, J.W. Shim, J. Sim, H.-G. Lee, G. Zi, Durability properties of a
concrete with waste glass sludge exposed to freeze-and-thaw condition and
de-icing salt, Constr. Building Mater. 66 (2014) 398–402.
[85] S.-C. Kou, C.-S. Poon, A novel polymer concrete made with recycled glass
aggregates, fly ash and metakaolin, Constr. Build. Mater. 41 (2013) 146–151.
[86] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, A.Y. Aboshama, Utilization of waste glass
powder in the production of cement and concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 124
(2016) 866–877.
[87] R. Madandoust, R. Ghavidel, Mechanical properties of concrete containing
waste glass powder and rice husk ash, Biosystems Eng. 116 (2) (2013) 113–
119.
[88] Z.Z. Ismail, E.A. Al-Hashmi, Recycling of waste glass as a partial replacement
for fine aggregate in concrete, Waste management 29 (2) (2009) 655–659.
[89] C. Shi, R.L. Day, Pozzolanic reaction in the presence of chemical activators:
Part I. Reaction kinetics, Cement Concr. Res. 30 (1) (2000) 51–58.
[90] F. Sajedi, H.A. Razak, Effects of thermal and mechanical activation methods on
compressive strength of ordinary Portland cement–slag mortar, Mater. Des.
32 (2) (2011) 984–995.
[91] M. Mirzahosseini, K.A. Riding, Effect of curing temperature and glass type on
the pozzolanic reactivity of glass powder, Cem. Concr. Res. 58 (2014) 103–
111.
[92] C. Shi, R.L. Day, Comparison of different methods for enhancing reactivity of
pozzolans, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (5) (2001) 813–818.
[93] J. Qian, C. Shi, Z. Wang, Activation of blended cements containing fly ash, Cem.
Concr. Res. 31 (8) (2001) 1121–1127.
[94] M. Ibrahim, M.A.M. Johari, M.K. Rahman, M. Maslehuddin, Effect of alkaline
activators and binder content on the properties of natural pozzolan-based
alkali activated concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 147 (2017) 648–660.
[95] A.G. Vayghan, A. Khaloo, F. Rajabipour, The effects of a hydrochloric acid pre-
treatment on the physicochemical properties and pozzolanic performance of
rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 39 (2013) 131–140.
[96] Z. Wu, T.R. Naik, Properties of concrete produced from multicomponent
blended cements, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (12) (2002) 1937–1942.
[97] V. Zˇivica, Effects of type and dosage of alkaline activator and temperature on
the properties of alkali-activated slag mixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (7)
(2007) 1463–1469.
[98] T. Bakharev, J. Sanjayan, Y.-B. Cheng, Effect of admixtures on properties of
alkali-activated slag concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (9) (2000) 1367–1374.
[99] A. Nazari, S. Riahi, The effects of TiO2 nanoparticles on physical, thermal and
mechanical properties of concrete using ground granulated blast furnace slag
as binder, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 528 (4) (2011) 2085–2092.
[100] S. Kawashima, P. Hou, D.J. Corr, S.P. Shah, Modification of cement-based
materials with nanoparticles, Cement Concr. Compos. 36 (2013) 8–15.
[101] S. Antiohos, A. Papageorgiou, V. Papadakis, S. Tsimas, Influence of quicklime
addition on the mechanical properties and hydration degree of blended
cements containing different fly ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (6) (2008)
1191–1200.
[102] S. Antiohos, S. Tsimas, Activation of fly ash cementitious systems in the
presence of quicklime: Part I. Compressive strength and pozzolanic reaction
rate, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (5) (2004) 769–779.
[103] L. Federico, S. Chidiac, Waste glass as a supplementary cementitious material
in concrete–critical review of treatment methods, Cement Concr. Compos. 31
(8) (2009) 606–610.
[104] P.S. Deb, P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, The effects of ground granulated blast-furnace
slag blending with fly ash and activator content on the workability and
strength properties of geopolymer concrete cured at ambient temperature,
Mater. Des. 62 (2014) 32–39.
[105] A. Gastaldini, G. Isaia, N. Gomes, J. Sperb, Chloride penetration and
carbonation in concrete with rice husk ash and chemical activators,
Cement Concr. Compos. 29 (3) (2007) 176–180.
[106] G. Li, Properties of high-volume fly ash concrete incorporating nano-SiO2,
Cement Concr. Res. 34 (6) (2004) 1043–1049.
[107] P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Use of OPC to improve setting and early strength
properties of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete cured at room
temperature, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 205–214.
[108] Y. Qing, Z. Zenan, K. Deyu, C. Rongshen, Influence of nano-SiO2 addition on
properties of hardened cement paste as compared with silica fume, Constr.
Build. Mater. 21 (3) (2007) 539–545.
[109] S.A. Bernal, E.D. Rodríguez, R.M. de Gutiérrez, J.L. Provis, S. Delvasto,
Activation of metakaolin/slag blends using alkaline solutions based on
chemically modified silica fume and rice husk ash, Waste Biomass
Valorization 3 (1) (2012) 99–108.
[110] R. Kumar, S. Kumar, S. Mehrotra, Towards sustainable solutions for fly ash
through mechanical activation, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 52 (2) (2007) 157–
179.
[111] F. Blanco, M. Garcia, J. Ayala, Variation in fly ash properties with milling and
acid leaching, Fuel 84 (1) (2005) 89–96.
[112] A. Fernández-Jiménez, A. Palomo, Composition and microstructure of alkali
activated fly ash binder: effect of the activator, Cement Concr. Res. 35 (10)
(2005) 1984–1992.
[113] A.S. De Vargas, D.C. Dal Molin, A.C. Vilela, F.J. Da Silva, B. Pavao, H. Veit, The
effects of Na2 O/SiO2 molar ratio, curing temperature and age on compressive
strength, morphology and microstructure of alkali-activated fly ash-based
geopolymers, Cement Concr. Compos. 33 (6) (2011) 653–660.
[114] A.M. Rashad, M.H. Khalil, A preliminary study of alkali-activated slag blended
with silica fume under the effect of thermal loads and thermal shock cycles,
Constr. Build. Mater. 40 (2013) 522–532.
[115] M. Shatat, Hydration behavior and mechanical properties of blended cement
containing various amounts of rice husk ash in presence of metakaolin,
Arabian J. Chem. 9 (2016) S1869–S1874.
[116] H. Huang, X. Gao, H. Wang, H. Ye, Influence of rice husk ash on strength and
permeability of ultra-high performance concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 149
(2017) 621–628.
[117] H.S. Müller, R. Breiner, J.S. Moffatt, M. Haist, Design and properties of
sustainable concrete, Procedia Eng. 95 (2014) 290–304.
[118] M.A. Elrahman, B. Hillemeier, Combined effect of fine fly ash and packing
density on the properties of high performance concrete: An experimental
approach, Constr. Build. Mater. 58 (2014) 225–233.
[119] A. Kar, I. Ray, A. Unnikrishnan, J.F. Davalos, Microanalysis and optimization-
based estimation of C-S–H contents of cementitious systems containing fly
ash and silica fume, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (3) (2012) 419–429.
[120] S. Hua, K. Wang, X. Yao, Developing high performance phosphogypsum-
based cementitious materials for oil-well cementing through a step-by-step
optimization method, Cement Concr. Compos. 72 (2016) 299–308.
[121] T. Proske, S. Hainer, M. Rezvani, C.-A. Graubner, Eco-friendly concretes with
reduced water and cement contents—Mix design principles and laboratory
tests, Cem. Concr. Res. 51 (2013) 38–46.
[122] R. Cepuritis, S. Jacobsen, T. Onnela, Sand production with VSI crushing and air
classification: optimising fines grading for concrete production with micro-
proportioning, Miner. Eng. 78 (2015) 1–14.
[123] R. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Development of an eco-friendly Ultra-High
Performance Concrete (UHPC) with efficient cement and mineral admixtures
uses, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 383–394.
[124] B. Akcay, M.A. Tasdemir, Optimisation of using lightweight aggregates in
mitigating autogenous deformation of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (1)
(2009) 353–363.
[125] B.E. Jimma, P.R. Rangaraju, Chemical admixtures dose optimization in
pervious concrete paste selection–A statistical approach, Constr. Build.
Mater. 101 (2015) 1047–1058.
[126] N.U. Kockal, T. Ozturan, Optimization of properties of fly ash aggregates for
high-strength lightweight concrete production, Mater. Des. 32 (6) (2011)
3586–3593.
[127] N. Tošic´, S. Marinkovic´, T. Dašic´, M. Stanic´, Multicriteria optimization of
natural and recycled aggregate concrete for structural use, J. Cleaner Prod. 87
(2015) 766–776.
[128] H. Binici, O. Aksogan, I.H. Cagatay, M. Tokyay, E. Emsen, The effect of particle
size distribution on the properties of blended cements incorporating GGBFS
and natural pozzolan (NP), Powder Technol. 177 (3) (2007) 140–147.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1089](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-28-320.jpg)
![[129] V. Tamilarasan, P. Perumal, D. Maheswaran, Workability studies on concrete
with GGBS as a replacement material for cement with and without
superplasticiser, in: International journal of advanced research in
engineering and technology (IJARET), 2012, pp. 11–21.
[130] D.P. Bentz, C.F. Ferraris, K.A. Snyder, Best practices guide for high-volume fly
ash concretes: Assuring properties and performance, 2013.
[131] H.A. Alaka, L.O. Oyedele, High volume fly ash concrete: The practical impact
of using superabundant dose of high range water reducer, J. Build. Eng. 8
(2016) 81–90.
[132] L. Yijin, Z. Shiqiong, Y. Jian, G. Yingli, The effect of fly ash on the fluidity of
cement paste, mortar, and concrete, in: International workshop on
Sustainable Development and Concrete Technology, Beijing, China, 2004,
pp. 339–345.
[133] S. Mukherjee, S. Mandal, U. Adhikari, Comparative study on physical and
mechanical properties of high Slump and zero slump high volume fly ash
concrete (HVFAC), Global NEST J. 20 (10) (2013) 1–7.
[134] B. Keertana, S. Gobhiga, Experimental study of concrete with partial
replacement of cement with rice husk ash and fine aggregate with granite
dust, IRACST-Eng. Sci. Technol.: Int. J. 6 (1) (2016) 36–41.
[135] A. Abalaka, Strength and some durability properties of concrete containing
rice husk ash produced in a charcoal incinerator at low specific surface, Int. J.
Concr. Struct. Mater. 7 (4) (2013) 287–293.
[136] S.R. Hunchate, S. Chandupalle, V.G. Ghorpode, R. Venkata, Mix design of high
performance concrete using silica fume and superplasticizer, Pan 18 (1.8)
(2014) 100.
[137] N. Amarkhail, Effects of silica fume on properties of high strength concrete,
Int. J. Tech. Res. Appl. 32 (2015) 13–19.
[138] S.K. Karri, G.R. Rao, P.M. Raju, Strength and Durability Studies on GGBS
Concrete, SSRG Int. J. Civil Eng. 2 (2015).
[139] S. Arivalagan, Sustainable studies on concrete with ggbs as a replacement
material in cement, Jordan J. Civil Eng. 8 (3) (2014) 263–270.
[140] H.T. Le, K. Siewert, H.-M. Ludwig, Alkali silica reaction in mortar formulated
from self-compacting high performance concrete containing rice husk ash,
Constr. Build. Mater. 88 (2015) 10–19.
[141] A. Ikpong, D. Okpala, Strength characteristics of medium workability ordinary
Portland cement-rice husk ash concrete, Build. Environ. 27 (1) (1992) 105–
111.
[142] H.K. Venkatanarayanan, P.R. Rangaraju, Effect of grinding of low-carbon rice
husk ash on the microstructure and performance properties of blended
cement concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 348–363.
[143] M.I. Malik, M. Bashir, S. Ahmad, T. Tariq, U. Chowdhary, Study of concrete
involving use of waste glass as partial replacement of fine aggregates, IOSR J.
Eng. (2013) 2278–8719.
[144] H. Liang, H. Zhu, E. Byars, Use of waste glass as aggregates in concrete, in: 7th
UK CARE Annual General Meeting, Greenwich, 2007, pp. 1–7.
[145] S. Abdallah, M. Fan, Characteristics of concrete with waste glass as fine
aggregate replacement, Int. J. Eng. Tech. Res. 2 (5) (2014) 11–17.
[146] H. Xu, W. Gong, L. Syltebo, K. Izzo, W. Lutze, I.L. Pegg, Effect of blast furnace
slag grades on fly ash based geopolymer waste forms, Fuel 133 (2014) 332–
340.
[147] N. Bouzoubaa, M. Lachemi, Self-compacting concrete incorporating high
volumes of class F fly ash: preliminary results, Cement Concr. Res. 31 (3)
(2001) 413–420.
[148] J. Brooks, M.M. Johari, M. Mazloom, Effect of admixtures on the setting times
of high-strength concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 22 (4) (2000) 293–301.
[149] D. Ravina, P.K. Mehta, Properties of fresh concrete containing large amounts
of fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 16 (2) (1986) 227–238.
[150] T. Nochaiya, W. Wongkeo, A. Chaipanich, Utilization of fly ash with silica
fume and properties of Portland cement–fly ash–silica fume concrete, Fuel 89
(3) (2010) 768–774.
[151] K.-L. Lin, H.-S. Shiu, J.-L. Shie, T.-W. Cheng, C.-L. Hwang, Effect of composition
on characteristics of thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD)
waste glass-metakaolin-based geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012)
501–507.
[152] H.-Y. Wang, The effect of the proportion of thin film transistor–liquid crystal
display (TFT–LCD) optical waste glass as a partial substitute for cement in
cement mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 791–797.
[153] L. Shen, Role of Aggregate Packing in Segregation Resistance and Flow
Behavior of self-Consolidating Concrete, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, 2007.
[154] Y. Xie, B. Liu, J. Yin, S. Zhou, Optimum mix parameters of high-strength self-
compacting concrete with ultrapulverized fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (3)
(2002) 477–480.
[155] M. Rahman, A. Muntohar, V. Pakrashi, B. Nagaratnam, D. Sujan, Self
compacting concrete from uncontrolled burning of rice husk and blended
fine aggregate, Mater. Des. 55 (2014) 410–415.
[156] Z. Wu, Y. Zhang, J. Zheng, Y. Ding, An experimental study on the workability
of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (5) (2009)
2087–2092.
[157] H. Yazıcı, The effect of silica fume and high-volume Class C fly ash on
mechanical properties, chloride penetration and freeze–thaw resistance of
self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (4) (2008) 456–462.
[158] A.F. Bingöl, _I. Tohumcu, Effects of different curing regimes on the compressive
strength properties of self compacting concrete incorporating fly ash and
silica fume, Mater. Des. 51 (2013) 12–18.
[159] M. Gesog˘lu, E. Güneyisi, E. Özbay, Properties of self-compacting concretes
made with binary, ternary, and quaternary cementitious blends of fly ash,
blast furnace slag, and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (5) (2009) 1847–
1854.
[160] R. Duval, E. Kadri, Influence of silica fume on the workability and the
compressive strength of high-performance concretes, Cement Concr. Res. 28
(4) (1998) 533–547.
[161] N.S. Msinjili, W. Schmidt, A. Rogge, H.-C. Kühne, Performance of rice husk ash
blended cementitious systems with added superplasticizers, Cement Concr.
Compos. (2017).
[162] A. Karthik, K. Sudalaimani, C.V. Kumar, Investigation on mechanical
properties of fly ash-ground granulated blast furnace slag based self curing
bio-geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 149 (2017) 338–349.
[163] M.S. Ismail, A. Waliuddin, Effect of rice husk ash on high strength concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (7) (1996) 521–526.
[164] M. Heikal, M. Morsy, I. Aiad, Effect of treatment temperature on the early
hydration characteristics of superplasticized silica fume blended cement
pastes, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (4) (2005) 680–687.
[165] J.E. Ujhelyi, A.J. Ibrahim, Hot weather concreting with hydraulic additives,
Cement Concr. Res. 21 (2–3) (1991) 345–354.
[166] E.E. Ali, S.H. Al-Tersawy, Recycled glass as a partial replacement for fine
aggregate in self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 785–
791.
[167] R. Vinai, A. Rafeet, M. Soutsos, W. Sha, The role of water content and paste
proportion on physico-mechanical properties of alkali activated fly ash-ggbs
concrete, J. Sustainable Metall. 2 (1) (2016) 51–61.
[168] O. Boukendakdji, E.-H. Kadri, S. Kenai, Effects of granulated blast furnace
slag and superplasticizer type on the fresh properties and compressive
strength of self-compacting concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (4) (2012)
583–590.
[169] R. Siddique, R. Bennacer, Use of iron and steel industry by-product (GGBS) in
cement paste and mortar, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 69 (2012) 29–34.
[170] P. Wainwright, H. Ait-Aider, The influence of cement source and slag
additions on the bleeding of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (7) (1995) 1445–
1456.
[171] W. Xu, Y.T. Lo, D. Ouyang, S.A. Memon, F. Xing, W. Wang, X. Yuan, Effect of
rice husk ash fineness on porosity and hydration reaction of blended cement
paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 89 (2015) 90–101.
[172] M. Benaicha, X. Roguiez, O. Jalbaud, Y. Burtschell, A.H. Alaoui, Influence of
silica fume and viscosity modifying agent on the mechanical and rheological
behavior of self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 84 (2015) 103–
110.
[173] P. Chindaprasirt, C. Jaturapitakkul, W. Chalee, U. Rattanasak, Comparative
study on the characteristics of fly ash and bottom ash geopolymers, Waste
Manage. 29 (2) (2009) 539–543.
[174] A. Kumar, D. Gupta, Behavior of cement-stabilized fiber-reinforced pond ash,
rice husk ash–soil mixtures, Geotext. Geomembr. 44 (3) (2016) 466–474.
[175] M. Shatat, Hydration behavior and mechanical properties of blended cement
containing various amounts of rice husk ash in presence of metakaolin,
Arabian J. Chem. (2014).
[176] E. Mohseni, M.M. Khotbehsara, F. Naseri, M. Monazami, P. Sarker,
Polypropylene fiber reinforced cement mortars containing rice husk ash
and nano-alumina, Constr. Build. Mater. 111 (2016) 429–439.
[177] S.P. Patil, K.K. Sangle, Shear and flexural behaviour of prestressed and non-
prestressed plain and SFRC concrete beams, J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci.
(2016).
[178] S.H. Sathawane, V.S. Vairagade, K.S. Kene, Combine effect of rice husk ash and
fly ash on concrete by 30% cement replacement, Procedia Eng. 51 (2013) 35–
44.
[179] P. Walczak, J. Małolepszy, M. Reben, K. Rzepa, Mechanical properties of
concrete mortar based on mixture of CRT glass cullet and fluidized fly ash,
Procedia Eng. 108 (2015) 453–458.
[180] A. Alhozaimy, P. Soroushian, F. Mirza, Mechanical properties of
polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete and the effects of pozzolanic
materials, Cement Concr. Compos. 18 (2) (1996) 85–92.
[181] S. Barbhuiya, S. Mukherjee, H. Nikraz, Effects of nano-Al2 O3 on early-age
microstructural properties of cement paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014)
189–193.
[182] J.N. Karadelis, Y. Lin, Flexural strengths and fibre efficiency of steel-fibre-
reinforced, roller-compacted, polymer modified concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 93 (2015) 498–505.
[183] M. Tatikonda, Modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of concrete containing
rice husk ash, Int. J. Adv. Found. Res. Sci. Eng. 1 (2015) 218–225.
[184] F.A.W. Chik, B.H.A. Bakar, M.A.M. Johari, R.P. Jaya, Properties of concrete block
containing rice husk ash subjected to GIRHA, Int. J. Res. Rev. Appl. Sci. 8 (1)
(2011) 57–64.
[185] R. Siddique, D. Kaur, Properties of concrete containing ground granulated
blast furnace slag (GGBFS) at elevated temperatures, Journal of Advanced
Research 3 (1) (2012) 45–51.
[186] P. Rovnaník, B. Rˇezník, P. Rovnaníková, Blended Alkali-activated Fly Ash/Brick
Powder Materials, Procedia Eng. 151 (2016) 108–113.
[187] O. Kayali, Fly ash lightweight aggregates in high performance concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (12) (2008) 2393–2399.
[188] B. Haranki, Strength, Modulus of Elasticity, Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete
used in Florida, University of Florida, 2009.
1090 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-29-320.jpg)
![[189] M. Serdar D. Bjegovic I.S. Oslakovic Shrinkage and creep of concrete prepared
with quaternary blended cement 2009 International Association for Bridge
and Structural Engineering IABSE Symposium Report 123 131
[190] Z.-H. He, L.-Y. Li, S.-G. Du, Creep analysis of concrete containing rice husk ash,
Cement Concr. Compos. 80 (2017) 190–199.
[191] M. Mazloom, A. Ramezanianpour, J. Brooks, Effect of silica fume on
mechanical properties of high-strength concrete, Cement Concr. Compos.
26 (4) (2004) 347–357.
[192] S.A. Kristiawan, A.P. Nugroho, Creep Behaviour of Self-compacting Concrete
Incorporating High Volume Fly Ash and its Effect on the Long-term Deflection
of Reinforced Concrete Beam, Procedia Eng. 171 (2017) 715–724.
[193] T. Barrett, I. De la Varga, J. Schlitter, W. Weiss, Reducing the risk of cracking in
high volume fly ash concrete by using internal curing, World of Coal Ash
Conference, Denver, CO, 2011.
[194] C.D. Atisß, High-volume fly ash concrete with high strength and low drying
shrinkage, J. Mater. Civil Eng. 15 (2) (2003) 153–156.
[195] X. Ling, Optimising short-term and long-term properties of high-volume fly
ash (HVFA) concrete, 2015.
[196] P. Havlásek, M. Jirásek, Multiscale modeling of drying shrinkage and creep of
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 85 (2016) 55–74.
[197] S. Wallah, B.V. Rangan, Low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete:
long-term properties, 2006.
[198] K. Folliard, C. Smith, G. Sellers, M. Brown, J. Breen, Evaluation of alternative
materials to control drying-shrinkage cracking in concrete bridge decks,
2003.
[199] S. Wallah, Creep behaviour of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Civil
Engineering Dimension 12 (2) (2010) 73–78.
[200] H.-H. Hung, Properties of High Volume Fly Ash Concrete, University of
Sheffield, 1997.
[201] J. Cripwell, J. Brooks, P. Wainwright, Time-dependent properties of concrete
containing pulverised fuel ash and a superplasticizer, in: Proceeding of the
2nd International Conference on Ash Technology and Marketing, Central
Electricity Generating Board, London, 1984, pp. 115–120.
[202] P. Gifford, M. Ward, Results of laboratory test on lean mass concrete utilising
fly ash to a high level of cement replacement, Proc. Int. Symp. (1982) 221–
229.
[203] R.L. Yuan, J.E. Cook, Study of a class C fly ash concrete, Spec. Publ. 79 (1983)
307–320.
[204] R. Lohtia, B. Nautiyal, O. Jain, Creep of fly ash concrete, J. Proc. (1976) 469–
472.
[205] A.E. Klausen, T. Kanstad, Ø. Bjøntegaard, E. Sellevold, Comparison of tensile
and compressive creep of fly ash concretes in the hardening phase, Cem.
Concr. Res. 95 (2017) 188–194.
[206] J. Forth, Predicting the tensile creep of concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 55
(2015) 70–80.
[207] W. Yang, Y. Xue, S. Wu, Y. Xiao, M. Zhou, Performance investigation and
environmental application of basic oxygen furnace slag–Rice husk ash based
composite cementitious materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 493–500.
[208] A. Parghi, M.S. Alam, Physical and mechanical properties of cementitious
composites containing recycled glass powder (RGP) and styrene butadiene
rubber (SBR), Constr. Build. Mater. 104 (2016) 34–43.
[209] H. Binici, Engineering properties of geopolymer incorporating slag, fly ash,
silica sand and pumice, Adv. Civ. Environ. Eng 1 (3) (2013) 108–123.
[210] H. Tian, Y. Zhang, The influence of bagasse fibre and fly ash on the long-term
properties of green cementitious composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 111
(2016) 237–250.
[211] A.S. Momtazi, R.Z. Zanoosh, The effects of polypropylene fibers and rubber
particles on mechanical properties of cement composite containing rice husk
ash, Procedia Eng. 10 (2011) 3608–3615.
[212] R. Siddique, K. Singh, M. Singh, V. Corinaldesi, A. Rajor, Properties of bacterial
rice husk ash concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 112–119.
[213] A.R. Bog˘a, M. Öztürk, _I.B. Topçu, Using ANN and ANFIS to predict the
mechanical and chloride permeability properties of concrete containing
GGBFS and CNI, Compos. B Eng. 45 (1) (2013) 688–696.
[214] K. Hassan, J. Cabrera, R. Maliehe, The effect of mineral admixtures on the
properties of high-performance concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 22 (4)
(2000) 267–271.
[215] M. Rostami, K. Behfarnia, The effect of silica fume on durability of alkali
activated slag concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 262–268.
[216] S.A. Zareei, F. Ameri, F. Dorostkar, M. Ahmadi, Rice husk ash as a partial
replacement of cement in high strength concrete containing micro silica:
Evaluating durability and mechanical properties, Case Stud. Constr. Mater.
(2017).
[217] A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho, Durability of mortar using waste glass powder
as cement replacement, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 205–215.
[218] A. Cheng, R. Huang, J.-K. Wu, C.-H. Chen, Influence of GGBS on durability and
corrosion behavior of reinforced concrete, Mater. Chem. Phys. 93 (2) (2005)
404–411.
[219] D.W. Mokarem, R.E. Weyers, D.S. Lane, Development of a shrinkage
performance specifications and prediction model analysis for supplemental
cementitious material concrete mixtures, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (5) (2005) 918–
925.
[220] M. Balapour, A. Ramezanianpour, E. Hajibandeh, An investigation on
mechanical and durability properties of mortars containing nano and micro
RHA, Constr. Build. Mater. 132 (2017) 470–477.
[221] F. Christopher, A. Bolatito, S. Ahmed, Structure and properties of mortar and
concrete with rice husk ash as partial replacement of ordinary portland
cement–A review, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. (2017).
[222] V. Ramachandran, Alkali-aggregate expansion inhibiting admixtures, Cement
Concr. Compos. 20 (2–3) (1998) 149–161.
[223] G.J. Xu, D.F. Watt, P.P. Hudec, Effectiveness of mineral admixtures in reducing
ASR expansion, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (6) (1995) 1225–1236.
[224] N.P. Hasparyk, P.J. Monteiro, H. Carasek, Effect of silica fume and rice husk
ash on alkali-silica reaction, Mater. J. 97 (4) (2000) 486–492.
[225] H.T. Le, Behaviour of Rice Husk Ash in Self-Compacting High Performance
Concrete Dissertation, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, 2015.
[226] R. Zerbino, G. Giaccio, O. Batic, G. Isaia, Alkali–silica reaction in mortars and
concretes incorporating natural rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012)
796–806.
[227] G.R. De Sensale, Effect of rice-husk ash on durability of cementitious
materials, Cement Concr. Compos. 32 (9) (2010) 718–725.
[228] R. Oberholster, W. Westra, The effectiveness of mineral admixtures in
reducing expansion due to alkali-aggregate reaction with Malmesbury Group
aggregates, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Alkali-aggregate reaction in concrete, Cape
Town, National Building Research Institute, Pretoria, paper S, 1981.
[229] A. Buck, USE of cementitious materials other than portland cement. concrete
durability. Katherine and Bryant mather internationl conference, Held at
Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 27 APRIL-MAY 1987, Publication of: American
Concrete Institute, 1987.
[230] J. Lindgård, Ö. Andiç-Çakır, I. Fernandes, T.F. Rønning, M.D. Thomas, Alkali–
silica reactions (ASR): literature review on parameters influencing laboratory
performance testing, Cement Concr. Res. 42 (2) (2012) 223–243.
[231] _I.B. Topçu, A.R. Bog˘a, T. Bilir, Alkali–silica reactions of mortars produced by
using waste glass as fine aggregate and admixtures such as fly ash and Li2
CO3, Waste Manage. 28 (5) (2008) 878–884.
[232] Ö. Özkan, _I. Yüksel, Studies on mortars containing waste bottle glass and
industrial by-products, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (6) (2008) 1288–1298.
[233] A. Behnood, H. Ziari, Effects of silica fume addition and water to cement ratio
on the properties of high-strength concrete after exposure to high
temperatures, Cement Concr. Compos. 30 (2) (2008) 106–112.
[234] S. Bernal, E. Rodríguez, R.M. de Gutiérrez, J. Provis, Performance at high
temperature of alkali-activated slag pastes produced with silica fume and
rice husk ash based activators, Materiales de Construcción 65 (318) (2015)
049.
[235] A.M. Rashad, A brief on high-volume Class F fly ash as cement replacement–a
guide for civil engineer, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 4 (2) (2015) 278–
306.
[236] Y. Chan, X. Luo, W. Sun, Compressive strength and pore structure of high-
performance concrete after exposure to high temperature up to 800 C, Cem.
Concr. Res. 30 (2) (2000) 247–251.
[237] F.-P. Cheng, V. Kodur, T.-C. Wang, Stress-strain curves for high strength
concrete at elevated temperatures, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (1) (2004)
84–90.
[238] I. Janotka, T. Nürnbergerová, Effect of temperature on structural quality of the
cement paste and high-strength concrete with silica fume, Nucl. Eng. Des.
235 (17) (2005) 2019–2032.
[239] D.L. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, K. Sagoe-Crentsil, Comparative performance of
geopolymers made with metakaolin and fly ash after exposure to elevated
temperatures, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (12) (2007) 1583–1589.
[240] D.L. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, Effect of elevated temperatures on geopolymer paste,
mortar and concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 40 (2) (2010) 334–339.
[241] Z. Pan, Z. Tao, T. Murphy, R. Wuhrer, High temperature performance of
mortars containing fine glass powders, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017).
[242] C.-S. Poon, S. Azhar, M. Anson, Y.-L. Wong, Comparison of the strength and
durability performance of normal-and high-strength pozzolanic concretes at
elevated temperatures, Cement Concr. Res. 31 (9) (2001) 1291–1300.
[243] A.M. Rashad, D.M. Sadek, H.A. Hassan, An investigation on blast-furnace stag
as fine aggregate in alkali-activated slag mortars subjected to elevated
temperatures, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 1086–1096.
[244] H. Tanyildizi, A. Coskun, The effect of high temperature on compressive
strength and splitting tensile strength of structural lightweight concrete
containing fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (11) (2008) 2269–2275.
[245] M.J. Terro, Properties of concrete made with recycled crushed glass at
elevated temperatures, Build. Environ. 41 (5) (2006) 633–639.
[246] Y. Xu, Y. Wong, C. Poon, M. Anson, Impact of high temperature on PFA
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (7) (2001) 1065–1073.
[247] P. Chindaprasirt, P. Kanchanda, A. Sathonsaowaphak, H. Cao, Sulfate
resistance of blended cements containing fly ash and rice husk ash, Constr.
Build. Mater. 21 (6) (2007) 1356–1361.
[248] B. Chatveera, P. Lertwattanaruk, Durability of conventional concretes
containing black rice husk ash, J. Environ. Manage. 92 (1) (2011) 59–66.
[249] R. Khan, A. Jabbar, I. Ahmad, W. Khan, A.N. Khan, J. Mirza, Reduction in
environmental problems using rice-husk ash in concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 30 (2012) 360–365.
[250] D. Roy, P. Arjunan, M. Silsbee, Effect of silica fume, metakaolin, and low-
calcium fly ash on chemical resistance of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (12)
(2001) 1809–1813.
[251] P. Chindaprasirt, S. Homwuttiwong, V. Sirivivatnanon, Influence of fly ash
fineness on strength, drying shrinkage and sulfate resistance of blended
cement mortar, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (7) (2004) 1087–1092.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1091](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-30-320.jpg)
![[252] K. Torii, M. Kawamura, Effects of fly ash and silica fume on the resistance of
mortar to sulfuric acid and sulfate attack, Cem. Concr. Res. 24 (2) (1994) 361–
370.
[253] K. Torii, K. Taniguchi, M. Kawamura, Sulfate resistance of high fly ash content
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (4) (1995) 759–768.
[254] C. Ouyang, A. Nanni, W.F. Chang, Internal and external sources of sulfate ions
in Portland cement mortar: two types of chemical attack, Cem. Concr. Res. 18
(5) (1988) 699–709.
[255] W.A. Tasong, S. Wild, R.J. Tilley, Mechanisms by which ground granulated
blastfurnace slag prevents sulphate attack of lime-stabilised kaolinite,
Cement Concr. Res. 29 (7) (1999) 975–982.
[256] E. Rozière, A. Loukili, R. El Hachem, F. Grondin, Durability of concrete exposed
to leaching and external sulphate attacks, Cem. Concr. Res. 39 (12) (2009)
1188–1198.
[257] A. Skaropoulou, S. Tsivilis, G. Kakali, J. Sharp, R. Swamy, Thaumasite form of
sulfate attack in limestone cement mortars: a study on long term efficiency of
mineral admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (6) (2009) 2338–2345.
[258] G. Osborne, Durability of Portland blast-furnace slag cement concrete,
Cement Concr. Compos. 21 (1) (1999) 11–21.
[259] D. Higgins, Increased sulfate resistance of ggbs concrete in the presence of
carbonate, Cement Concr. Compos. 25 (8) (2003) 913–919.
[260] D. Higgins, N. Crammond, Resistance of concrete containing GGBS to the
thaumasite form of sulfate attack, Cement Concr. Compos. 25 (8) (2003) 921–
929.
[261] M. Uysal, M. Sumer, Performance of self-compacting concrete containing
different mineral admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (11) (2011) 4112–
4120.
[262] M. O’Connell, C. McNally, M.G. Richardson, Performance of concrete
incorporating GGBS in aggressive wastewater environments, Constr. Build.
Mater. 27 (1) (2012) 368–374.
[263] H.-Y. Wang, A study of the effects of LCD glass sand on the properties of
concrete, Waste Manage. 29 (1) (2009) 335–341.
[264] A.F. Omran, D. Etienne, D. Harbec, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Long-term performance
of glass-powder concrete in large-scale field applications, Constr. Build.
Mater. 135 (2017) 43–58.
[265] D. Harbec, A. Zidol, A. Tagnit-Hamou, F. Gitzhofer, Mechanical and durability
properties of high performance glass fume concrete and mortars, Constr.
Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 142–156.
[266] E. Ganjian, H.S. Pouya, The effect of Persian Gulf tidal zone exposure on
durability of mixes containing silica fume and blast furnace slag, Constr.
Build. Mater. 23 (2) (2009) 644–652.
[267] Z. Makhloufi, S. Aggoun, B. Benabed, E. Kadri, M. Bederina, Effect of
magnesium sulfate on the durability of limestone mortars based on
quaternary blended cements, Cement Concr. Compos. 65 (2016) 186–199.
[268] M.A.E. Aziz, S.A.E. Aleem, M. Heikal, H.E. Didamony, Hydration and durability
of sulphate-resisting and slag cement blends in Caron’s Lake water, Cem.
Concr. Res. 35 (8) (2005) 1592–1600.
[269] Y. Gao, G. De Schutter, G. Ye, Z. Tan, K. Wu, The ITZ microstructure, thickness
and porosity in blended cementitious composite: Effects of curing age, water
to binder ratio and aggregate content, Compos. B Eng. 60 (2014) 1–13.
[270] C. Lian, Y. Zhuge, Optimum mix design of enhanced permeable concrete–an
experimental investigation, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (12) (2010) 2664–2671.
[271] H. Yazıcı, M.Y. Yardımcı, H. Yig˘iter, S. Aydın, S. Türkel, Mechanical properties
of reactive powder concrete containing high volumes of ground granulated
blast furnace slag, Cement Concr. Compos. 32 (8) (2010) 639–648.
[272] P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and early strength
properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in ambient condition, Constr.
Build. Mater. 66 (2014) 163–171.
[273] D. Wang, Z. Chen, On predicting compressive strengths of mortars with
ternary blends of cement, GGBFS and fly ash, Cement Concr. Res. 27 (4)
(1997) 487–493.
[274] H.A. Mohamed, Effect of fly ash and silica fume on compressive strength of
self-compacting concrete under different curing conditions, Ain Shams Eng. J.
2 (2) (2011) 79–86.
[275] P.S. Deb, P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Drying shrinkage of slag blended fly ash
geopolymer concrete cured at room temperature, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015)
594–600.
[276] M. Reiner, K. Rens, High-volume fly ash concrete: analysis and application,
Practice Periodical Struct. Des. Constr. 11 (1) (2006) 58–64.
[277] D. Hopkins, M. Thomas, D. Oates, G. Girn, R. Munro, York University uses
High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete for Green Building, Annual conference of the
canadian Society for Civil Engineering, CSCE, 2001.
[278] C. Griffin, Sustainability, performance and mix design of high volume fly ash
concrete, 2005. web.pdx.edu/$cgriffin/research/cgriffin_HVFA.pdf.
[279] A.M. Rashad, Cementitious materials and agricultural wastes as natural fine
aggregate replacement in conventional mortar and concrete, Journal of
Building Engineering 5 (2016) 119–141.
[280] P. Mehta, High-performance, high-volume fly ash concrete for sustainable
development, in: W. K. (Ed.) Proceedings of International Workshop on
Sustainable development and concrete technology, Beijing, China, May 20-
21, 2004, pp. 3-14
[281] E. Yang, Y. Yang, V.C. Li, Use of high volumes of fly ash to improve ECC
mechanical properties and material greenness, ACI materials journal 104 (6)
(2007) 620–628.
[282] R. Yu, P. Tang, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, A study of multiple effects of nano-silica
and hybrid fibres on the properties of Ultra-High Performance Fibre
Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) incorporating waste bottom ash (WBA),
Constr. Build. Mater. 60 (2014) 98–110.
[283] R. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Mix design and properties assessment of ultra-
high performance fibre reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), Cement Concr. Res. 56
(2014) 29–39.
[284] E. Ghafari, H. Costa, E. Júlio, Critical review on eco-efficient ultra high
performance concrete enhanced with nano-materials, Constr. Build. Mater.
101 (2015) 201–208.
[285] M. Kamal, M. Safan, Z. Etman, R. Salama, Behavior and strength of beams cast
with ultra high strength concrete containing different types of fibers, HBRC
Journal 10 (1) (2014) 55–63.
[286] K. Van Breugel, N. Van Tuan, Ultra high performance concrete made with rice
husk ash for reduced autogenous shrinkage, in: Proceedings of the 4th
International FIB Congress, Mumbai, India, 10-14 February 2014; Authors
version, Universities Press, 2014.
[287] V. Vaitkevicˇius, E. Šerelis, Influence of Silica Fume on Ultrahigh Performance
Concrete, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and
Architectural Engineering 8 (1) (2014) 37–42.
[288] A. Tagnit-Hamou, N. Soliman, A. Omran, Green ultra-high-performance glass
concrete, First interactive Symposium on UHPC 2016, 2016.
[289] S. Kou, F. Xing, The effect of recycled glass powder and reject fly ash on the
mechanical properties of fibre-reinforced ultrahigh performance concrete,
Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2012 (2012).
[290] E. Ghafari, H. Costa, E. Júlio, A. Portugal, L. Durães, The effect of nanosilica
addition on flowability, strength and transport properties of ultra high
performance concrete, Mater. Des. 59 (2014) 1–9.
[291] S. Abbas, A.M. Soliman, M.L. Nehdi, Exploring mechanical and durability
properties of ultra-high performance concrete incorporating various steel
fiber lengths and dosages, Constr. Build. Mater. 75 (2015) 429–441.
[292] K. Arunachalam, M. Vigneshwari, Experimental investigation on ultra high
strength concrete containing mineral admixtures under different curing
conditions, Int. J. Civil Struct. Eng. 2 (1) (2011) 33.
[293] M. Aldahdooh, N.M. Bunnori, M.M. Johari, Evaluation of ultra-high-
performance-fiber reinforced concrete binder content using the response
surface method, Mater. Des. 52 (2013) 957–965.
[294] M. Aldahdooh, N.M. Bunnori, M.M. Johari, Influence of palm oil fuel ash on
ultimate flexural and uniaxial tensile strength of green ultra-high
performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites, Mater. Des. 54
(2014) 694–701.
[295] R. Xiao, Z.-C. Deng, C. Shen, Properties of ultra high performance concrete
containing superfine cement and without silica fume, J. Adv. Concr. Technol.
12 (2) (2014) 73–81.
[296] M. Gesoglu, E. Güneyisi, A.H. Nahhab, H. Yazıcı, Properties of ultra-high
performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites made with gypsum-
contaminated aggregates and cured at normal and elevated temperatures,
Constr. Build. Mater. 93 (2015) 427–438.
[297] E. Güneyisi, M. Gesoglu, O.A. Azez, H.Ö. Öz, Effect of nano silica on
the workability of self-compacting concretes having untreated and
surface treated lightweight aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 115 (2016)
371–380.
[298] K. Habel, M. Viviani, E. Denarié, E. Brühwiler, Development of the mechanical
properties of an ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC),
Cem. Concr. Res. 36 (7) (2006) 1362–1370.
[299] G. Habert, E. Denarié, A. Šajna, P. Rossi, Lowering the global warming impact
of bridge rehabilitations by using Ultra High Performance Fibre Reinforced
Concretes, Cement Concr. Compos. 38 (2013) 1–11.
[300] A. Hassan, G. Mahmud, S. Jones, C. Whitford, A new test method for
investigating punching shear strength in Ultra High Performance Fibre
Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) slabs, Compos. Struct. 131 (2015) 832–841.
[301] H. Kim, T. Koh, S. Pyo, Enhancing flowability and sustainability of ultra high
performance concrete incorporating high replacement levels of industrial
slags, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 153–160.
[302] M.-X. Xiong, J.R. Liew, Mechanical behaviour of ultra-high strength concrete
at elevated temperatures and fire resistance of ultra-high strength concrete
filled steel tubes, Mater. Des. 104 (2016) 414–427.
[303] G. Choe, G. Kim, N. Gucunski, S. Lee, Evaluation of the mechanical properties
of 200MPa ultra-high-strength concrete at elevated temperatures and
residual strength of column, Constr. Build. Mater. 86 (2015) 159–168.
[304] C. Shi, D. Wang, L. Wu, Z. Wu, The hydration and microstructure of ultra high-
strength concrete with cement–silica fume–slag binder, Cement Concr.
Compos. 61 (2015) 44–52.
[305] Z. Wu, C. Shi, K. Khayat, Influence of silica fume content on microstructure
development and bond to steel fiber in ultra-high strength cement-based
materials (UHSC), Cement Concr. Compos. 71 (2016) 97–109.
[306] Z. Wu, C. Shi, K.H. Khayat, S. Wan, Effects of different nanomaterials on
hardening and performance of ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), Cement
Concr. Compos. 70 (2016) 24–34.
[307] D. Wang, C. Shi, Z. Wu, L. Wu, S. Xiang, X. Pan, Effects of nanomaterials on
hardening of cement–silica fume–fly ash-based ultra-high-strength concrete,
Adv. Cement Res. 28 (9) (2016) 555–566.
[308] A. El Mir, S.G. Nehme, K. Nehme, In situ application of high and ultra high
strength concrete, Építöanyag (Online) (1) (2016) 20.
[309] M.L. Romero, C. Ibañez, A. Espinos, J. Portolés, A. Hospitaler, Influence of
ultra-high strength concrete on circular concrete-filled dual steel columns,
Structures, Elsevier, 2016.
1092 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-31-320.jpg)
![[310] D. Yao, J. Jia, F. Wu, F. Yu, Shear performance of prestressed ultra high
strength concrete encased steel beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014) 194–
201.
[311] H. Yazıcı, The effect of curing conditions on compressive strength of ultra
high strength concrete with high volume mineral admixtures, Build. Environ.
42 (5) (2007) 2083–2089.
[312] S. Allena, C.M. Newtson, Ultra-high strength concrete mixtures using local
materials, J. Civil Eng. Archit. 5 (4) (2011).
[313] N.A. Libre, M. Shekarchi, M. Mahoutian, P. Soroushian, Mechanical properties
of hybrid fiber reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete made with natural
pumice, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (5) (2011) 2458–2464.
[314] J. Choi, G. Zi, S. Hino, K. Yamaguchi, S. Kim, Influence of fiber reinforcement
on strength and toughness of all-lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater.
69 (2014) 381–389.
[315] L.A.T. Bui, C.L. Hwang, C.T. Chen, M.Y. Hsieh, Characteristics of cold-bonded
lightweight aggregate produced with different mineral admixtures, Appl.
Mech. Mater., Trans Tech Publ (2012) 978–983.
[316] A. Sivakumar, P. Gomathi, Pelletized fly ash lightweight aggregate concrete: a
promising material, J. Civil Eng. Constr. Technol. 3 (2) (2012) 42–48.
[317] N. Yazdani, E. Goucher, Increasing durability of lightweight concrete through
FRP wrap, Compos. B Eng. 82 (2015) 166–172.
[318] O. Kayali, M. Haque, B. Zhu, Drying shrinkage of fibre-reinforced lightweight
aggregate concrete containing fly ash, Cement Concr. Res. 29 (11) (1999)
1835–1840.
[319] C.-L. Hwang, L.A.-T. Bui, K.-L. Lin, C.-T. Lo, Manufacture and performance of
lightweight aggregate from municipal solid waste incinerator fly ash and
reservoir sediment for self-consolidating lightweight concrete, Cement
Concr. Compos. 34 (10) (2012) 1159–1166.
[320] D.O. Oyejobi, T.S. Abdulkadir, V.M. Ajibola, Investigation of rice husk ash
cementitious constituent in concrete, J. Agr. Technol. 10 (3) (2014)
533–542.
[321] J. Torkaman, A. Ashori, A.S. Momtazi, Using wood fiber waste, rice husk ash,
and limestone powder waste as cement replacement materials for
lightweight concrete blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 50 (2014) 432–436.
[322] Q. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Ultra-lightweight concrete: conceptual design
and performance evaluation, Cement Concr. Compos. 61 (2015) 18–28.
[323] I. Ling, D. Teo, Properties of EPS RHA lightweight concrete bricks under
different curing conditions, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (8) (2011) 3648–3655.
[324] F. Koksal, O. Gencel, M. Kaya, Combined effect of silica fume and expanded
vermiculite on properties of lightweight mortars at ambient and elevated
temperatures, Constr. Build. Mater. 88 (2015) 175–187.
[325] S. Erdem, X-ray computed tomography and fractal analysis for the evaluation
of segregation resistance, strength response and accelerated corrosion
behaviour of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 61
(2014) 10–17.
[326] O. Ünal, T. Uygunog˘lu, A. Yildiz, Investigation of properties of low-strength
lightweight concrete for thermal insulation, Build. Environ. 42 (2) (2007)
584–590.
[327] M.I. Kaffetzakis, C.G. Papanicolaou, Bond behavior of reinforcement in
Lightweight Aggregate Self-Compacting Concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 113
(2016) 641–652.
[328] H. Du, S. Du, X. Liu, Effect of nano-silica on the mechanical and transport
properties of lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 114–122.
[329] W. Wongkeo, A. Chaipanich, Compressive strength, microstructure and
thermal analysis of autoclaved and air cured structural lightweight
concrete made with coal bottom ash and silica fume, Mater. Sci. Eng., A
527 (16) (2010) 3676–3684.
[330] K.-S. Youm, J. Moon, J.-Y. Cho, J.J. Kim, Experimental study on strength and
durability of lightweight aggregate concrete containing silica fume, Constr.
Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 517–527.
[331] B. Kucharczyková, Z. Keršner, O. Pospíchal, P. Misák, P. Daneˇk, P. Schmid, The
porous aggregate pre-soaking in relation to the freeze–thaw resistance of
lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 761–766.
[332] M. Shannag, Characteristics of lightweight concrete containing mineral
admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 658–662.
[333] B. Arisoy, H.-C. Wu, Material characteristics of high performance lightweight
concrete reinforced with PVA, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (4) (2008) 635–645.
[334] M. Thomas, T. Bremner, Performance of lightweight aggregate concrete
containing slag after 25 years in a harsh marine environment, Cem. Concr.
Res. 42 (2) (2012) 358–364.
[335] A. Al-Sibahy, R. Edwards, Mechanical and thermal properties of novel
lightweight concrete mixtures containing recycled glass and metakaolin,
Constr. Build. Mater. 31 (2012) 157–167.
[336] S. Chidiac, S. Mihaljevic, Performance of dry cast concrete blocks containing
waste glass powder or polyethylene aggregates, Cement Concr. Compos. 33
(8) (2011) 855–863.
[337] P. Spiesz, S. Rouvas, H. Brouwers, Utilization of waste glass in translucent and
photocatalytic concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 128 (2016) 436–448.
[338] B.L.A. Tuan, C.-L. Hwang, K.-L. Lin, Y.-Y. Chen, M.-P. Young, Development of
lightweight aggregate from sewage sludge and waste glass powder for
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 334–339.
[339] Y.-L. Wei, C.-Y. Lin, K.-W. Ko, H.P. Wang, Preparation of low water-sorption
lightweight aggregates from harbor sediment added with waste glass, Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 63 (5) (2011) 135–140.
[340] R. Demirbog˘a, R. Gül, Production of high strength concrete by use of
industrial by-products, Build. Environ. 41 (8) (2006) 1124–1127.
[341] M. Haque, O. Kayali, Properties of high-strength concrete using a fine fly ash,
Cem. Concr. Res. 28 (10) (1998) 1445–1452.
[342] C. Poon, L. Lam, Y. Wong, A study on high strength concrete prepared with
large volumes of low calcium fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (3) (2000) 447–455.
[343] J. Kumar, K. Ramana, Use of copper slag and fly ash in high strength concrete,
Int. J. Sci. Res. 4 (10) (2014) 777–781.
[344] A. Zeyad, M.M. Johari, B. Tayeh, M.O. Yusuf, Efficiency of treated and
untreated palm oil fuel ash as a supplementary binder on engineering and
fluid transport properties of high-strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 125
(2016) 1066–1079.
[345] P. Sharmila, G. Dhinakaran, Compressive strength, porosity and sorptivity of
ultra fine slag based high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 120 (2016)
48–53.
[346] M. Elchalakani, T. Aly, E. Abu-Aisheh, Sustainable concrete with high volume
GGBFS to build Masdar City in the UAE, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 1 (2014)
10–24.
[347] Ö. Kırca, _I.Ö. Yaman, M. Tokyay, Compressive strength development of
calcium aluminate cement–GGBFS blends, Cement Concr. Compos. 35 (1)
(2013) 163–170.
[348] H.-B. Zhu, M.-Z. Yan, P.-M. Wang, C. Li, Y.-J. Cheng, Mechanical performance
of concrete combined with a novel high strength organic fiber, Constr. Build.
Mater. 78 (2015) 289–294.
[349] A.R. Bagheri, H. Zanganeh, M.M. Moalemi, Mechanical and durability
properties of ternary concretes containing silica fume and low reactivity
blast furnace slag, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (5) (2012) 663–670.
[350] D. Sharma, S. Sharma, A. Goyal, Utilization of waste foundry slag and
alccofine for developing high strength concrete, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 11 (4)
(2016) 3190–3205.
[351] K. Amnadnua, W. Tangchirapat, C. Jaturapitakkul, Strength, water
permeability, and heat evolution of high strength concrete made from the
mixture of calcium carbide residue and fly ash, Mater. Des. 51 (2013) 894–
901.
[352] H. Mahmud, S. Bahri, Y. Yee, Y. Yeap, Effect of rice husk ash on strength and
durability of high strength high performance concrete, World Acad. Sci., Eng.
Technol., Int. J. Civil, Environ., Struct., Constr. Arch. Eng. 10 (3) (2016) 375–
380.
[353] J. Alex, J. Dhanalakshmi, B. Ambedkar, Experimental investigation on rice
husk ash as cement replacement on concrete production, Constr. Build.
Mater. 127 (2016) 353–362.
[354] Sß. Erdog˘du, C. Arslantürk, Sß. Kurbetci, Influence of fly ash and silica fume on
the consistency retention and compressive strength of concrete subjected to
prolonged agitating, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (3) (2011) 1277–1281.
[355] L. Chandra, D. Hardjito, The impact of using fly ash, silica fume and calcium
carbonate on the workability and compressive strength of mortar, Procedia
Eng. 125 (2015) 773–779.
[356] M. Amin, K. Abu el-Hassan, Effect of using different types of nano materials
on mechanical properties of high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 80
(2015) 116–124.
[357] M. Khan, W. Abbass, Flexural behavior of high-strength concrete beams
reinforced with a strain hardening cement-based composite layer, Constr.
Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 927–935.
[358] F. Pelisser, N. Zavarise, T.A. Longo, A.M. Bernardin, Concrete made with
recycled tire rubber: effect of alkaline activation and silica fume addition, J.
Cleaner Prod. 19 (6) (2011) 757–763.
[359] M. Sarıdemir, Effect of silica fume and ground pumice on compressive
strength and modulus of elasticity of high strength concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 49 (2013) 484–489.
[360] M.N. Islam, M.F. Mohd Zain, M. Jamil, Prediction of strength and slump of rice
husk ash incorporated high-performance concrete, J. Civil Eng. Manage. 18
(3) (2012) 310–317.
[361] K. Arunachalam, R. Gopalakrishnan, Experimental Investigation on high
performance fly ash Concrete in normal and aggressive environment, 29th
Conference on Our World in Concrete Structures, Singapore City, 2004, pp.
181-188.
[362] M. Safiuddin, J. West, K. Soudki, Hardened properties of self-consolidating
high performance concrete including rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos.
32 (9) (2010) 708–717.
[363] T. Ponikiewski, J. Gołaszewski, The rheological and mechanical properties of
high-performance self-compacting concrete with high-calcium fly ash,
Procedia Eng. 65 (2013) 33–38.
[364] F.A. Sabet, N.A. Libre, M. Shekarchi, Mechanical and durability properties of
self consolidating high performance concrete incorporating natural zeolite,
silica fume and fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 44 (2013) 175–184.
[365] A. Gonzalez-Corominas, M. Etxeberria, C.S. Poon, Influence of steam curing on
the pore structures and mechanical properties of fly-ash high performance
concrete prepared with recycled aggregates, Cement Concr. Compos. 71
(2016) 77–84.
[366] A. Borosnyói, Long term durability performance and mechanical properties of
high performance concretes with combined use of supplementary cementing
materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 307–324.
[367] O. Büyüköztürk, D. Lau, High Performance Concrete: Fundamentals and
Application, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 2005.
[368] A. Camões, P. Rocha, J. Pereira, J. Aguiar, S. Jalali, Low cost high performance
concrete using low quality fly ash, in: ERMCO 98: 12th European Ready
Mixed Concrete Congress, 1998, pp. 478-486.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1093](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-32-320.jpg)
![[369] P.-K. Chang, An approach to optimizing mix design for properties of high-
performance concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (4) (2004) 623–629.
[370] S. Chen, C.-S. Chang, H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang, Mixture design of high
performance recycled liquid crystal glasses concrete (HPGC), Constr. Build.
Mater. 25 (10) (2011) 3886–3892.
[371] W. Ling, T. Pei, Y. Yan, Application of ground granulated blast furnace slag in
high-performance concrete in China, International Workshop on Sustainable
Development and Concrete Technology, Organized by China Building
Materials Academy, PRC, 2004, pp. 309–317.
[372] COWI, Fly ash in production of high performance concrete in Denmark.,
Denmark, 2009.
[373] U. Avila-López, J. Almanza-Robles, J. Escalante-García, Investigation of novel
waste glass and limestone binders using statistical methods, Constr. Build.
Mater. 82 (2015) 296–303.
[374] D. Huiskes, A. Keulen, Q. Yu, H. Brouwers, Design and performance evaluation
of ultra-lightweight geopolymer concrete, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 516–526.
[375] G. Maranan, A. Manalo, B. Benmokrane, W. Karunasena, P. Mendis, Evaluation
of the flexural strength and serviceability of geopolymer concrete beams
reinforced with glass-fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars, Eng. Struct. 101
(2015) 529–541.
[376] A. Petrillo, R. Cioffi, C. Ferone, F. Colangelo, C. Borrelli, Eco-sustainable
Geopolymer concrete blocks production process, Agr. Agric. Sci. Procedia 8
(2016) 408–418.
[377] J. He, Y. Jie, J. Zhang, Y. Yu, G. Zhang, Synthesis and characterization of red
mud and rice husk ash-based geopolymer composites, Cement Concr.
Compos. 37 (2013) 108–118.
[378] L. Assi, S. Ghahari, E.E. Deaver, D. Leaphart, P. Ziehl, Improvement of the early
and final compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete at
ambient conditions, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 806–813.
[379] J. Xie, O. Kayali, Effect of superplasticiser on workability enhancement of
Class F and Class C fly ash-based geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 122
(2016) 36–42.
[380] Z. Zhang, J.L. Provis, J. Zou, A. Reid, H. Wang, Toward an indexing approach to
evaluate fly ashes for geopolymer manufacture, Cem. Concr. Res. 85 (2016)
163–173.
[381] M. Torres-Carrasco, F. Puertas, Waste glass in the geopolymer preparation.
Mechanical and microstructural characterisation, J. Cleaner Prod. 90 (2015)
397–408.
[382] R. Martinez-Lopez, J.I. Escalante-Garcia, Alkali activated composite binders of
waste silica soda lime glass and blast furnace slag: strength as a function of
the composition, Constr. Build. Mater. 119 (2016) 119–129.
[383] I. Kourti, A.R. Devaraj, A.G. Bustos, D. Deegan, A.R. Boccaccini, C.R.
Cheeseman, Geopolymers prepared from DC plasma treated air pollution
control (APC) residues glass: properties and characterisation of the binder
phase, J. Hazard. Mater. 196 (2011) 86–92.
[384] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, H.A. Salem, Effect of water addition,
plasticizer and alkaline solution constitution on fly ash based geopolymer
concrete performance, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 694–703.
[385] W. Zhou, C. Yan, P. Duan, Y. Liu, Z. Zhang, X. Qiu, D. Li, A comparative study of
high-and low-Al 2 O 3 fly ash based-geopolymers: The role of mix proportion
factors and curing temperature, Mater. Des. 95 (2016) 63–74.
[386] P. Duxson, J.L. Provis, G.C. Lukey, J.S. Van Deventer, The role of inorganic
polymer technology in the development of ‘green concrete’, Cem. Concr. Res.
37 (12) (2007) 1590–1597.
[387] M. Šejnoha, M. Broucˇek, E. Novotná, Z. Keršner, D. Lehky´ , P. Frantı´k, Fracture
properties of cement and alkali activated fly ash based concrete with
application to segmental tunnel lining, Adv. Eng. Softw. 62 (2013) 61–71.
[388] Q. Nie, C. Zhou, H. Li, X. Shu, H. Gong, B. Huang, Numerical simulation of fly
ash concrete under sulfate attack, Constr. Build. Mater. 84 (2015) 261–268.
[389] K.T. Nguyen, N. Ahn, T.A. Le, K. Lee, Theoretical and experimental study on
mechanical properties and flexural strength of fly ash-geopolymer concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 106 (2016) 65–77.
[390] V.Z. Zadeh, C. Bobko, Nanomechanical characteristics of lightweight
aggregate concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials
exposed to elevated temperature, Constr. Build. Mater. 51 (2014) 198–206.
[391] X. Wang, K. Park, Analysis of compressive strength development of concrete
containing high volume fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 98 (2015) 810–819.
[392] G. Golewski, P. Golewski, T. Sadowski, Numerical modelling crack
propagation under Mode II fracture in plain concretes containing siliceous
fly-ash additive using XFEM method, Comput. Mater. Sci. 62 (2012) 75–78.
[393] Z.S. Metaxa, M.S. Konsta-Gdoutos, S.P. Shah, Crack Free Concrete Made With
Nanofiber Reinforcement, Developing a Research Agenda for Transportation
Infrastructure Preservation and Renewal Conference, 2009.
[394] M. Nehdi, J. Duquette, A. El Damatty, Performance of rice husk ash produced
using a new technology as a mineral admixture in concrete, Cement Concr.
Res. 33 (8) (2003) 1203–1210.
[395] P.C. Association, Guide specification for concrete subject to alkali-silica
reactions, Portland Cement Association1994.
[396] M.M. Johari, J. Brooks, S. Kabir, P. Rivard, Influence of supplementary
cementitious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (5) (2011) 2639–2648.
[397] J.G. Jawahar, C. Sashidhar, I.R. Reddy, J.A. Peter, Design of cost-effective M 25
grade of self compacting concrete, Mater. Des. 49 (2013) 687–692.
[398] S.H. Ahmad, S.P. Shah, Structural properties of high strength concrete and its
implications for precast prestressed concrete, PCI Journal 30 (6) (1985) 92–
119.
[399] N. Bester, Structural Concrete Properties and Practice.
[400] A. Baldwin, C.-S. Poon, L.-Y. Shen, S. Austin, I. Wong, Designing out waste in
high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and
traditional construction, Renewable Energy 34 (9) (2009) 2067–2073.
[401] N. Soliman, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Partial substitution of silica fume with fine
glass powder in UHPC: Filling the micro gap, Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017)
374–383.
[402] N.A. Soliman, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Using glass sand as an alternative for quartz
sand in UHPC, Constr. Build. Mater. 145 (2017) 243–252.
[403] A.H.A. Jamil, M.S. Fathi, The integration of lean construction and sustainable
construction: a stakeholder perspective in analyzing sustainable lean
construction strategies in Malaysia, Procedia Computer Science 100 (2016)
634–643.
[404] Y. Ballim, P.C. Graham, The effects of supplementary cementing materials in
modifying the heat of hydration of concrete, Mater. Struct. 42 (6) (2009) 803–
811.
[405] H. Toutanji, N. Delatte, S. Aggoun, R. Duval, A. Danson, Effect of
supplementary cementitious materials on the compressive strength and
durability of short-term cured concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (2) (2004) 311–
319.
[406] W. Fajun, M.W. Grutzeck, D.M. Roy, The retarding effects of fly ash upon the
hydration of cement pastes: the first 24 hours, Cem. Concr. Res. 15 (1) (1985)
174–184.
[407] S. Antiohos, J. Tapali, M. Zervaki, J. Sousa-Coutinho, S. Tsimas, V. Papadakis,
Low embodied energy cement containing untreated RHA: a strength
development and durability study, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013)
455–463.
[408] T.-C. Ling, C.S. Poon, Spent fluorescent lamp glass as a substitute for fine
aggregate in cement mortar, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017).
[409] J.-X. Lu, Z.-H. Duan, C.S. Poon, Fresh properties of cement pastes or mortars
incorporating waste glass powder and cullet, Constr. Build. Mater. 131 (2017)
793–799.
[410] P. Walczak, J. Małolepszy, M. Reben, P. Szyman´ ski, K. Rzepa, Utilization of
waste glass in autoclaved aerated concrete, Procedia Eng. 122 (2015) 302–
309.
[411] I.B. Topcu, M. Canbaz, Properties of concrete containing waste glass, Cement
Concr. Res. 34 (2) (2004) 267–274.
[412] Y. Shao, T. Lefort, S. Moras, D. Rodriguez, Studies on concrete containing
ground waste glass, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (1) (2000) 91–100.
[413] A. Shayan, A. Xu, Value-added utilisation of waste glass in concrete, Cement
Concr. Res. 34 (1) (2004) 81–89.
[414] G. Lee, C.S. Poon, Y.L. Wong, T.C. Ling, Effects of recycled fine glass aggregates
on the properties of dry–mixed concrete blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 38
(2013) 638–643.
[415] A. Omran, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Performance of glass-powder concrete in field
applications, Constr. Build. Mater. 109 (2016) 84–95.
[416] F.N. Okoye, S. Prakash, N.B. Singh, Durability of fly ash based geopolymer
concrete in the presence of silica fume, J. Cleaner Prod. 149 (2017) 1062–
1067.
[417] R. van Gijlswijk, S. Pascale, S. de Vos, G. Urbano, V.I.S.N. alla Dogana, Carbon
footprint of concrete based on secondary materials, HERON 60 (1/2) (2015)
113.
[418] X. Cao, X. Li, Y. Zhu, Z. Zhang, A comparative study of environmental
performance between prefabricated and traditional residential buildings in
China, J. Cleaner Prod. 109 (2015) 131–143.
[419] I. Topcu, High-volume ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS)
concrete, Eco-Efficient Concrete (2013) 218–240.
[420] C. Meyer, N. Egosi, C. Andela, Concrete with waste glass as aggregate, in:
Proceedings of the international symposium concrete technology unit of
ASCE and University of Dundee, Dundee, 2001, pp. 179–87.
[421] M. Alkaysi, S. El-Tawil, Z. Liu, W. Hansen, Effects of silica powder and cement
type on durability of ultra high performance concrete (UHPC), Cement Concr.
Compos. 66 (2016) 47–56.
[422] A. Lampropoulos, S.A. Paschalis, O. Tsioulou, S.E. Dritsos, Strengthening of
reinforced concrete beams using ultra high performance fibre reinforced
concrete (UHPFRC), Eng. Struct. 106 (2016) 370–384.
[423] P. Posi, P. Thongjapo, N. Thamultree, P. Boontee, P. Kasemsiri, P.
Chindaprasirt, Pressed lightweight fly ash-OPC geopolymer concrete
containing recycled lightweight concrete aggregate, Constr. Build. Mater.
127 (2016) 450–456.
[424] F. D’Alessandro, F. Asdrubali, G. Baldinelli, Multi-parametric characterization
of a sustainable lightweight concrete containing polymers derived from
electric wires, Constr. Build. Mater. 68 (2014) 277–284.
[425] A.P. Fantilli, A.D. Cavallo, G. Pistone, Fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete
slabs for the maintenance of the Soleri Viaduct, Eng. Struct. 99 (2015) 184–
191.
[426] S. Ghasemi, P. Zohrevand, A. Mirmiran, Y. Xiao, K. Mackie, A super lightweight
UHPC–HSS deck panel for movable bridges, Eng. Struct. 113 (2016) 186–193.
[427] L. Yun-Ming, H. Cheng-Yong, M.M. Al Bakri, K. Hussin, Structure and
properties of clay-based geopolymer cements: A, Prog. Mater Sci. 83 (2016)
595–629.
[428] R.A.A.B. Santa, C. Soares, H.G. Riella, Geopolymers with a high percentage of
bottom ash for solidification/immobilization of different toxic metals, J.
Hazard. Mater. 318 (2016) 145–153.
[429] G. Maranan, A. Manalo, B. Benmokrane, W. Karunasena, P. Mendis, Behavior
of concentrically loaded geopolymer-concrete circular columns reinforced
1094 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-33-320.jpg)
![longitudinally and transversely with GFRP bars, Eng. Struct. 117 (2016) 422–
436.
[430] A.M. Aguirre-Guerrero, R.A. Robayo-Salazar, R.M. de Gutiérrez, A novel
geopolymer application: Coatings to protect reinforced concrete against
corrosion, Appl. Clay Sci. (2016).
[431] E. Gartner, Industrially interesting approaches to ‘‘low-CO2” cements, Cement
Concr. Res. 34 (9) (2004) 1489–1498.
[432] A.R. Sakulich, Reinforced geopolymer composites for enhanced material
greenness and durability, Sustainable Cities Soc. 1 (4) (2011) 195–210.
[433] R.K. Sandhu, R. Siddique, Influence of rice husk ash (RHA) on the properties of
self-compacting concrete: A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 153 (2017) 751–
764.
[434] D.M. Roy, Alkali-activated cements opportunities and challenges, Cem. Concr.
Res. 29 (2) (1999) 249–254.
[435] M. Zhang, R. Lastra, V. Malhotra, Rice-husk ash paste and concrete: some
aspects of hydration and the microstructure of the interfacial zone between
the aggregate and paste, Cement Concr. Res. 26 (6) (1996) 963–977.
[436] H. Chao-Lung, B. Le Anh-Tuan, C. Chun-Tsun, Effect of rice husk ash on the
strength and durability characteristics of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 25
(9) (2011) 3768–3772.
[437] H.B. Mahmud, M.F.A. Malik, R.A. Kahar, M.F.M. Zain, S.N. Raman, Mechanical
properties and durability of normal and water reduced high strength grade
60 concrete containing rice husk ash, J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 7 (1) (2009) 21–
30.
[438] G.R. de Sensale, Strength development of concrete with rice-husk ash,
Cement Concr. Compos. 28 (2) (2006) 158–160.
[439] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, E.d.M.R. Fairbairn, Use of ultrafine rice husk
ash with high-carbon content as pozzolan in high performance concrete,
Mater. Struct. 42 (7) (2009) 983–992.
[440] R. Yu, Q. Song, X. Wang, Z. Zhang, Z. Shui, H. Brouwers, Sustainable
development of Ultra-High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete
(UHPFRC): towards to an optimized concrete matrix and efficient fibre
application, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017).
[441] M. Radlinski, J. Olek, Investigation into the synergistic effects in ternary
cementitious systems containing portland cement, fly ash and silica fume,
Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (4) (2012) 451–459.
[442] W. Qiang, W. Dengquan, C. Honghui, The role of fly ash microsphere in the
microstructure and macroscopic properties of high-strength concrete,
Cement Concr. Compos. (2017).
[443] F.U. Shaikh, S.W. Supit, Compressive strength and durability properties of
high volume fly ash (HVFA) concretes containing ultrafine fly ash (UFFA),
Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 192–205.
[444] D. Shen, X. Shi, S. Zhu, X. Duan, J. Zhang, Relationship between tensile Young’s
modulus and strength of fly ash high strength concrete at early age, Constr.
Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 317–326.
[445] A. Mehta, R. Siddique, B.P. Singh, S. Aggoun, G. Łagód, D. Barnat-Hunek,
Influence of various parameters on strength and absorption properties of fly
ash based geopolymer concrete designed by Taguchi method, Constr. Build.
Mater. 150 (2017) 817–824.
[446] N.C. Thang, N. TUAN, L. THANH, P. HANH, Y. GUANG, Ultra High Performance
Concrete using a combination of Silica Fume and Ground Granulated Blast-
Furnace Slag in Vietnam, in: The international Conference on Sustainable
Built Environment for Now and the Future, 2013, pp. 26–27.
[447] A. Dehghan, K. Peterson, A. Shvarzman, Recycled glass fiber reinforced
polymer additions to Portland cement concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 146
(2017) 238–250.
[448] M. Gesoglu, E. Güneyisi, G.F. Muhyaddin, D.S. Asaad, Strain hardening ultra-
high performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites: effect of fiber
type and concentration, Compos. B Eng. 103 (2016) 74–83.
[449] W. Kushartomo, I. Bali, B. Sulaiman, Mechanical behavior of reactive powder
concrete with glass powder substitute, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015) 617–622.
[450] R. Harbi, R. Derabla, Z. Nafa, Improvement of the properties of a mortar with
5% of kaolin fillers in sand combined with metakaolin, brick waste and glass
powder in cement, Constr. Build. Mater. 152 (2017) 632–641.
K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1095
View publication statsView publication stats](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/greenconcreteprospectschallengesnew-200917034959/85/Green-concrete-prospects-challengesnew-34-320.jpg)
Uploaded byTăng Văn Lâm
Green concrete prospects challengesnew
This document discusses the prospects and challenges of green concrete. Green concrete utilizes waste materials as supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) and aggregates, promoting effective waste management and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Common SCMs used in green concrete include rice husk ash, silica fume, fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag, and waste glass. Green concrete offers benefits like improved strength, workability, durability, and reduced cracking. However, more research, standards, and demonstration projects are needed for large-scale adoption of green concrete in infrastructure projects.
Green concrete prospects challengesnew
- 1. See discussions, stats,and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320097486 Green concrete: Prospects and challenges Article in Construction and Building Materials · December 2017 DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.008 CITATIONS 28 READS 606 3 authors, including: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Self-funded project View project Multiscale Cauchy-Born modeling of the biomechanics of red blood cell membrane View project Adebayo Sojobi City University of Hong Kong 21 PUBLICATIONS 127 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE L.W. Zhang Shanghai Jiao Tong University 119 PUBLICATIONS 3,876 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Adebayo Sojobi on 17 July 2019. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
- 2. Review Green concrete: Prospectsand challenges K.M. Liew a,b,⇑ , A.O. Sojobi a , L.W. Zhang c,⇑ a Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China b City University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Research Institute, Nanshan District, Shenzhen 518057, Guangdong, China c School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China h i g h l i g h t s Green concrete utilizes waste materials as SCM and aggregates in concrete. It promotes effective waste management, GHG reduction and resource conservation. Benefits: improved strength, workability, durability, pumpability, reduced cracking. Benefits: reduction of construction maintenance costs and increased service life. More R D, standards and large-scale demonstration projects are required. a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 28 April 2017 Received in revised form 29 August 2017 Accepted 1 September 2017 Available online 20 September 2017 Keywords: Green concrete High-volume fly ash concrete Ultra-high performance concrete Lightweight concrete Geopolymer concrete a b s t r a c t Utilization of green concrete in construction is increasingly adopted by the construction industry owing to the drawbacks of conventional concrete and the numerous inherent benefits of green concrete. The increasing demand for green concrete has been spurred by demand for high quality concrete products, desire of nations to reduce green-house gas emission, need for conservation of natural resources and lim- ited landfill spaces. Green concrete comes in various forms such as high-volume fly ash concrete, ultra- high performance concrete, geopolymer concrete, lightweight concrete to mention a few. Green concrete offers numerous environmental, technical benefits and economic benefits such as high strength, increased durability, improved workability and pumpability, reduced permeability, controlled bleeding, superior resistance to acid attack, and reduction of plastic shrinkage cracking. These characteristics pro- motes faster concrete production, reduction of curing waiting time, reduction of construction costs, early project completion, reduction of maintenance costs and increased service life of construction projects. Green concrete promotes sustainable and innovative use of waste materials and unconventional alterna- tive materials in concrete. Suitable standards, more demonstration projects, as well as adequate training, public awareness, cross-disciplinary collaborations and further research and developments are required to promote global adoption of green concrete in large-scale infrastructure projects. Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 2. Common waste materials used as SCM in green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 2.1. RHA as SCM in green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 2.2. Silica fume as SCM in green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 2.3. Fly ash as SCM in green concrete. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 2.4. GGBFS as SCM in green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 2.5. Waste glass as SCM in green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 3. Activation techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 4. Production of green concrete. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 5. Properties of green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.008 0950-0618/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding authors. E-mail addresses: kmliew@cityu.edu.hk (K.M. Liew), zlvwen@hotmail.com (L.W. Zhang). Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Construction and Building Materials journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
- 3. 5.1. Fresh properties.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 5.1.1. Slump and water requirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 5.1.2. Setting time, flow, workability, segregation index, bleeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 5.2. Hard properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 5.2.1. Compressive strength. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 5.2.2. Flexural strength. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 5.2.3. Splitting tensile strength and modulus of elasticity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 5.2.4. Shrinkage and creep . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 5.3. Durability properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074 5.3.1. Water absorption and porosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074 5.3.2. Chloride penetration and alkali silica reaction (ASR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074 5.3.3. Fire-resistance and chemical attack properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 6. Factors that influence properties of green concrete. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 6.1. SCM chemical composition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 6.2. Water/binder (w/b) ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 6.3. Curing medium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 7. Binary, ternary and quarternary SCM mixtures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 8. Nomenclature and applications of green concrete utilized in concrete structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 8.1. HVFAC (High volume fly ash concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 8.2. UHPC (Ultra high performance concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 8.3. UHSC (Ultra high strength concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 8.4. LWC (Lightweight concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 8.5. HSC (High strength concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 8.6. HPC (High performance concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 8.7. GPC (Geopolymer concrete) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 9. Analytical and numerical modelling of green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 10. Potential benefits of green concrete in early project completion and cost savings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 11. Future trends in production and application of green concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086 12. Current challenges and obstacles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 13. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Nomenclature SCM Supplementary cementitious material SF Silica fume RHA Rice husk ash GGBS GGBFS Ground granulated blast-furnace slag WG Waste glass NS Nano-silica PPF Polypropylene fibres BOFS Basic oxygen furnace slag RAC Recycled aggregate concrete FFA Fine fly ash RHAC Rice husk ash concrete FAC Fly ash concrete FA-HSC Fly ash-based high strength concrete SFC Silica fume concrete UHPC Ultra-high performance concrete WGC Waste glass concrete GF Glass fume from waste glass C3S (tricalcium silicate) C2S (dicalcium silicate) RHAC Rice husk ash concrete SCC Self-consolidating concrete HPC High-performance concrete AA Alternative aggregates OPC Ordinary Portland cement RRHA Raw rice hush ash NanoA Nano-Al2O3 CNI Calcium nitrite-based corrosion inhibitor FA50L 50%Fly ash content HVFAC High-volume fly ash concrete HPSCC High performance self-consolidating concrete FA Fly ash CRT Cathode ray tube waste glass GFRP Glass fibre reinforced polymer CS Compressive strength SP Superplasticizer w/b water binder ratio w/cm water-cementitious ratio w/scm water-supplementary cementitious materials ratio ASR Alkali silica reaction RPC Reactive powder concrete MK Metakaolin SiO2ÀEff Effective amorphous silica content Seff Effective surface area of SCM CN Carbon nanotube HSC High strength concrete UHPC Ultra high strength concrete LWC Lightweight concrete BRAC Bacterial rice husk ash concrete CRHA Rice husk ash from controlled burning 1064 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 4. 1. Introduction Globally, managementof solid wastes poses a herculean chal- lenge to developed and developing countries owing to industrial growth, construction booms, rapid urbanization, and consumeric lifestyle [1]. The demand for green concrete in construction indus- try is spurred by increased regulations to reduce carbon footprint, limit greenhouse gas emission and limited landfill spaces. In addi- tion, the construction industry is embracing green construction owing to project requirements for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certifications. The present high demand for natural resources to meet infras- tructural demands has created immense opportunities for the use of waste materials to green infrastructure construction [2–5]. These waste materials play the roles of either supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) or alternative aggregates (AA) in green concrete and can be categorized as agricultural, industrial and municipal wastes as shown in Fig. 1. Though coined in Denmark in 1999, green concrete has been in practical existence for several decades and centuries. Jin and Chen [6] defined green concrete as concrete produced by utilizing alter- native or recycled waste materials in order to reduce energy con- sumption, environmental impact and natural resource consumption. Green concrete is a concept of embracing and inte- grating environmental considerations in concrete with respect to raw material sourcing, mix design, structural design, construction and maintenance of concrete structures [7]. The inherent drawbacks of traditional concrete include unsus- tainable consumption of natural raw materials, low, early-age compressive strength, environmental contamination [8–10]. On the other hand, green concrete exhibit numerous advantages such as improvement in concrete properties, low carbon footprint, conservation of natural resources, to mention a few [11]. The major barriers for green concrete utilization in construction are systemic lock-in, lower qualities of locally available materials, increase in construction costs, and technical barriers [6,12]. In order to produce sustainable green concrete, technological advances that are energy efficient, utilize low-carbon production methods and novel cement formulations are required alongside technical guidelines for their production and usage [13]. 2. Common waste materials used as SCM in green concrete The waste materials utilized in green concrete can be grouped into three categories namely agricultural, industrial and municipal wastes as depicted in Fig. 1. In order to utilize their pozzolanic properties in green concrete, the waste materials are often acti- vated through physical or chemical means or their combination [14,15]. 2.1. RHA as SCM in green concrete Various studies have been carried out on the utilization of rice husk ash (RHA) as supplementary cementitious material and sand replacement in various concrete applications [14,16–20]. Utilization of RHA offers numerous benefits in concrete. A few of the benefits include improvement of microstructure, void struc- ture reformation, increased early age strength, by reducing the width of the ITZ between paste and aggregate [21–23]. It was observed that the optimum parameters recommended for RHA to maximize its pozzolanic properties in concrete varied amongst different researches mainly because of the different con- stituents utilized in combination with RHA, variation in the pro- duction process and applications. Despite many researches on RHA as SCM in concrete and mor- tar, the relationship between the particle size and pozzolanic prop- erties of RHA is not yet well understood. Previous researchers have made attempt to explain their relationship with various degrees of success. A positive relationship exist between Blaine specific sur- face area (SSA) of RHA and its pozzolanicity but an inverse relation- ship with median particle size ðd50Þ [24]. On the other hand, the multilayered, angular and microporous surface of RHA was reported to be the major factor controlling the pozzolanic reaction [25]. In-depth literature studies revealed that the pozzolanic proper- ties of RHA are influenced by its particle size and specific surface area, percentage replacement of cement, and water-cement ratio. In addition, it was observed that the influence of SSA of RHA often supersedes that of particle size ðd50Þ. This finding was corroborated in earlier studies [25–27]. Givi et al. [26] reported that 5 lm RHA particle size with SSA of 36:47 m2 =g recorded the higher compres- sive strength (CS) compared to 95 lm RHA particle size with SSA of 24 m2 =g. In a similar vein, the highest CS28 (51.8 MPa) was obtained with the smallest RHA particle (11.5 lm) and the highest SSA (30.4) by another researcher [25]. These values were higher compared to the other samples with corresponding particle sizes of 31.3 and 18.3 lm, BET SSA of 27.4 and 29.1 and corresponding CS28 of 48.4 and 50.2 MPa respectively. The above results lend cre- dence to the dominance and importance of SSA to both RHA poz- zolanicity and compressive strength development of concrete. Previous work by Cyr et al. [28]established that SCMs exhibit both pozzolanic and physical effects, which can be quantified. The pozzolanic contribution of SCM was reported in Eq. (1): Dfpz ¼ apz 1 þ b Seff c ð1Þ where Dfpz = pozzolanic contribution of SCM (RHA); apz = depth in time of hydration; b = BET surface area of cement (Type 1 OPC), which varies with water-cement ratio as shown in Fig. 2; Seff = Effective surface area of SCM as shown in Eq. (2); c = 1. Seff ¼ SsxgP ð2Þ where Ss = SSA of RHA; gP = efficiency factor obtained from the work of Cyr et al. [29]. Likewise, it was also reported that amor- phous silica content of RHA can also be used to reliably assess the pozzolanic potential of different RHA samples using Eq. (3) [27]. SiO2ÀEff ¼ Min ðp; pmaxÞ Á SiO2ÀAmorphous 1 À Minðp; pmaxÞ ð3Þ where SiO2ÀEff = effective amorphous silica content (%);SiO2ÀAmorphous = amorphous silica content of RHA samples; p = % RHA replacement of cement, which could reach up to maximum ðPmaxÞ. SiO2ÀEff is the amount of amorphous SiO2 that is able to react, given the replace- ment level p, maximum replacement level pmax and amorphous sil- Agricultur al wastes Rice husk ash Corn cob ash Sawd ust ash Industrial wastes Fly ash Silica fume Granula ted blast furnace slag Municipal wastes Glass PlasƟcs Paper Fig. 1. Categories of Wastes utilized in Green Concrete. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1065
- 5. ica content. TheSiO2ÀEff result obtained was utilized in place Seff in equation for comparison purposes. Experimental data presented by Zunino and Lopez [27] were used for analyses because they utilized RHA from different suppli- ers with different d50, BET SSA and SiO2 amorphous content. Although the experiment was conducted at 20% RHA replacement of cement and 0.5 w/c ratio, it was extended to higher replacement ratios using the formulas given above. Our results revealed that the pozzolanic contribution of RHA varies with median particle size, water-cement ratio, specific surface area and percentage RHA replacement of cement as shown in Figs. 3–6. In addition, the highest pozzolanic contribution occurred at 0.35 water-cement ratio, 30% cement replacement and 14.467 lm. This correspond with the maximum results obtained by another study [30]. Furthermore, it was also observed that the pozzolanic contribution increased with increasing BET SSA and increasing reduction in median particle sizes. Therefore, in order to enhance the pozzolanic contribution of RHA in concrete, RHA particles with both smaller specific surface area and smaller parti- cle sizes should be utilized to give maximum pozzolanic contribu- tion. This implies smaller RHA particle sizes have the potential to offer more pozzolanic contribution in concrete provided they have higher SSA. Furthermore, the potentials of RHA in concrete is yet to be fully realized since most reported experiments in literature were con- ducted at sub-optimal experimental conditions. Therefore, more researches are needed to find cost-effective and affordable meth- ods to improve the SSA of locally available RHA to encourage its adoption and widespread utilization. From Fig. 7, it was observed that the pozzolanic contribution obtained using SiO2ÀEff proposed by Zunino and Lopez [27] gave higher effective surface values at all median particle sizes com- pared to the method using the SSAEff suggested by Cyr et al. [29]. Even though the two approaches showed similar trend up to med- ian particle size of 20.644 lm, their results differed afterwards. Calculation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA in concrete using the SiO2ÀEff could be a better approach. This is also supported by the fact that SiO2 constitutes about 80–90% of RHA by mass and it is the major source of its pozzolanicity [26,30–32]. Therefore, in order to optimize the pozzolanic potentials of RHA, proper attention must be paid to its production process as well as its chemical composition alongside other concrete/cement constituent materials utilized in RHAC [23,33]. Optimum grinding time for RHA depends on the incineration/ burning temperature it was subjected to, burning duration, type of incineration equipment utilized, level of pre-treatment of the RHA, the speed and type of grinding machine utilized. The optimum cement replacement with RHA is governed by the SSA of the RHA, RHA particle size, w/c ratio, presence of other SCM, w=cm ratio, type, chemical and mineralogical composition of cement and SCM utilized [21,34,35]. Other parameters that may affect optimum cement replacement include type and dosage of super plasticizer and target engineering properties to be opti- mized, size of the concrete aggregates, porosity of the concrete and pre-treatment and activation level of RHA. Jamil et al. [35] reported that optimum replacement percentage ratio of RHA in each type of cement varies as the % of C3S (trical- cium silicate) and C2S (dicalcium silicate) varies with cement types and the amount of CaðOHÞ2 produced during cement hydration. The authors also mentioned that optimum replacement percentage ratio of RHA will increase with increase in percentage of foreign compounds in RH samples and also percentage of non-reactive crystalline silica in RHA. In addition, the authors reported that par- ticle size, SSA, pozzolanic reactivity and pore structure are the main factors governing cement hydration and invariably cement replacements in concrete. The ash type, grinding time and cement percentage replacements effects and their interactions were also reported to affect strength development of RHAC [36]. The authors recommended Type 2 ash prepared at 650 °C, grinding time of 240 min and 20% or 40% cement replacement with RHA. Negative impacts of RHA in concrete include reduction of flowa- bility, high water requirement, flow blockage and increase in superplasticizer requirements. Others include reduction of strength at high RHA content, poor chloride permeability at high RHA content and ASR reaction in alkaline solution. These negative impacts can be ameliorated through careful optimization of the production processes of RHA and RHAC and utilization of appropri- ate optimum RHA contents for concrete applications. 2.2. Silica fume as SCM in green concrete Silica fume (SF) has been used in various applications [37–44] and acted as SCM, filler and healing agents. Benefits offered by SF in concrete are improved flexural and compressive strengths, increased pozzolanic activity, multi-range macroporosity proper- ties, to mention a few [41,43–46]. Its multi-range macroporosity properties allow its usage in the production of high-porosity cement foams and multi-strength lightweight concrete (LWC). SF was also found useful in increasing ultimate-load carrying capac- ity, improved durability and impact resistance [37–40,47]. Opti- mum dosage of SF ranges between 10 and 14% when used in combination with materials such as steel fibres, nano-silica, recy- cled aggregate [37,39,40]. One of the negative impacts of SF in concrete include reduction in workability [48]. Also, SF was reported ineffective in reducing creep [49] and caused reduction in long-term compressive strength [50]. Increase in chloride-initiated reinforcement corro- sion in marine environment was also reported and was found to be mitigated at low w=c ratio [51]. 2.3. Fly ash as SCM in green concrete Previous studies have investigated the use of fly ash as SCM in various concrete applications [52–58]. The benefits derived from the use of fly ash were increase in compressive strength (CS), bulk density and linear shrinkage, porosity reduction, improvement in bending toughness and ductility [52,53,58]. In order to ensure satisfactory properties, curing time, curing temperature and type of materials used in fly-ash concrete (FAC) must be carefully selected [55,56]. Optimum production conditions should also be utilized depending on exposure conditions of the y = 21.86x + 35.46 R² = 0.974 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0.35 0.4 0.5 0.57 0.7 BETSSA(m2/g) w/c raƟo Fig. 2. Variation of BET SSA of cement with w/c ratio [28]. 1066 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 6. envisaged FAC product[54,55,59,60]. The fly ash could be from anthracite or bituminous coal, lignite or sub-bituminous coals [61]. Negative impacts of fly ash in high-volume fly ash concrete (HVFAC) include extended setting times, slow strength develop- ment, low early-age strength, construction delay, difficulties to use in cold weather concreting and low resistance to deicer-salt scaling carbonation [62]. Kurad et al. [63] also advised against high volume applications of RHA in concrete to avoid retardation of compressive strength development. In addition, high class C fly ash can increase ASR in silica fume concrete (SFC) [64]. 2.4. GGBFS as SCM in green concrete Ground granulated blast furnace slag has been investigated for use in production of geopolymer concrete (GPC) and alkali- activated slag (AAS) cements [65,66]. The benefits of SF in concrete 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953 PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa) RHA median parƟcle size, D50 (μm) 0.35 w/c 0.4 w/c 0.5 w/c 0.57 w/c 0.7 w/c Fig. 3. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with Particle size and water-cement ratio. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953 PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa) RHA ParƟcle Size, D50 (μm) 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Fig. 4. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with particle size at different percentage replacements. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 23.582 31.284 52.114 114.523 128.85 PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa) BET SSA (m2/g) 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Fig. 5. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with BET SSA and percentage replacement. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1067
- 7. are improvement indurability, enhancement of long-term CS to mention a few [67,68]. Optimum OPC=GGBFS ratio of 4:1 at 0.3 water-binder ðw=bÞ ratio and cement-sand ratio of 1:1.5 were recommended by Chi- diac and Panesar [69,66]. Low percentage replacements and low water-to-powder ratios were recommended to avoid bleeding, shrinkage straining and obtain high CS [70,71]. GGBFS and fly ash were reported to initiate corrosion and increase critical corrosion. On the contrary, laboratory evidence and field practice have shown their usefulness in the achievement of durable structures even in most aggressive natural environ- ments [72,73]. In addition, it was reported that there is no need for extra steel protection when these SCMs are utilized in concrete [74]. However, it was pointed out that their combination should be avoided and appropriate precautions in concrete technology should be taken in their concrete applications as well. 2.5. Waste glass as SCM in green concrete Waste glass has been utilized as SCM and fine aggregates in var- ious applications such as ultra-lightweight fibre reinforced con- crete, fired-clay bricks to mention a few [75–79]. Other applications include glass-reinforced panels, structural repair con- crete and fast-cured polymer concrete [80–83]. The benefits of the utilization of WG were improved CS, resis- tance to freezing and thawing, chloride penetration and surface scaling, good resistance to Na2CO3 and H2SO4 [84,85]. The recom- mended optimum percentage as cement and fine aggregate replacements were 5–10% and 7.5–25% respectively [80,86,87]. Negative impacts of waste glass in concrete include slump reduction at high waste glass content as well as decrease in com- pressive strength [88]. These impacts can be ameliorated by val- orization of waste glass to become glass fume, usage of appropriate w/c ratio and waste glass content. 3. Activation techniques Activation is necessary to prevent slow and low, early-age strength development and accelerate the pozzolanic reactivity of SCMs in green concrete. Activation helps to achieve higher early and later strength amongst other benefits [89]. Types of activation techniques available in literature include mechanical activation, chemical activation, curing/temperature activation, water- controlled activation and SCM-controlled activation. Mechanical activation involves grinding of SCM to smaller fine particles to increase fineness and their effective specific surface area. Chemical activation is the addition or utilization of chemical substances to activate the pozzolanicity of cementitious materials [90]. Curing/temperature activation refers to the use of curing medium with age and temperature to achieve property develop- ment of the concrete. The curing medium could be air, water, alter- nating combination of both. Temperature activation refers to the use of elevated tempera- tures above room temperature to activate the reactivity of the con- crete constituents. Commonly utilized activation media utilized in temperature-controlled activation are air or water. SCM-controlled activation involves the use of SCM or cement to accelerate poz- zolanic reactions of the pozzolans. Elevated temperature curing at 50 °C favours pozzolanic behaviour of glass particles which also depends on the glass composition [91]. Particle size smaller than 25 lm was recommended. Chemical activation is the most efficient and feasible activation method [92]. Examples of chemical activators found in literature utilized in green concrete are sodium sulphate anhydrite, sodium silicate, acids such as HCl and H2SO4, CaCl2, Na2SO4, NaOH, Na2CO3, CaðOHÞ2, K2SO4, TiO2, Calcium formate. The chemical acti- vators could be added during grinding or combined with temperature-controlled activation to reduce total materials costs [92]. For instance, combination of grinding and addition of Na2SO4 achieved higher strength than single activation [93]. Advantages of chemical activation include reduction of setting time, early strength development, reduction of total material costs, higher SiO2 content, lower alkali and unburned carbon contents, better grindability and smaller particle size, achievement of superior strength and enhancement of microstructural properties [94–97]. Sometimes, chemical activation is combined with temperature-controlled activation. Other benefits of chemical activation include improved worka- bility, reduced shrinkage and prevents deterioration of later-age strength, improved pore structure, accelerated hydration and improved flexural strength of self-compacting concrete, reduction of pore size and total porosity [98,99]. Kawashima et al. [100] reported that addition of nano-CaCO3 prepared through sonication improved hydration rate, setting time and CS of self-consolidating concrete. Achieved reduction in initial and final setting times as well as improvement in CS through the use of colloidal nanosilica. In another study, quicklime was recommended for High-volume fly ash systems only, with positive contribution to both early and later-age strength development [101]. Addition of quicklime increased both early and later-strength of FA-based cementitious sytems [102]. For WGC, lithium compounds were suggested to limit ASR expansion [103]. SCM-controlled activation has been used to improve bond strength, reduce the setting time, achieve early-age and high late 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% PozzolaniccontribuƟon,fpz(MPa) RHA content (%) 14.467 μm 19.123 μm 19.623 μm 20.644 μm 20.953μm Fig. 6. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with percentage replacement using different particle sizes. 0 5 10 15 20 25 14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953 EffecƟvesurfacearea(m2/g) RHA median parƟcle size, d50 (μm) SiO2-eff SSAeff Fig. 7. Comparison of pozzolanic contribution using SiO2-Eff and SSAEff.. 1068 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 8. strength and reduce[104–108]. Commonly utilized SCMs include OPC, nano-SiO2, GGBFS. Bernal et al. [109] advocate silicate-based activators produced from SF or RHA in combination with aqueous NaOH as an alternative to commercial-based activators. The mechanical performance of the binders produced were similar to those of commercial silicate solutions. In order to achieve synergistic benefits, sometimes thermal and mechanical activation are combined. The benefits of such method include early-strength development, removal of inconsistencies in the chemical and mineralogical properties of RHA [15,90]. According to Kumar et al. [110], the effects of mechanical acti- vation depend on the type of activation device utilized. Their study revealed that raw fly ash exhibited highest lime reactivity, fol- lowed by vibratory mill fly ash, and then attrition mill fly ash. Blanco et al. [111] suggested mechanical activation prior to chem- ical activation to increase SSA and pozzolanic reactivity of SCM. The type of activator used influences the microstructure of the mortar or concrete and the resulting secondary products formed [112]. Based on their results, in terms of CS, the order of preference of alkali activator was NaOH + WG NaOH Na2CO3. They also observed that, in fly-ash binders, the ratio of SiO2=Na2O and their pH seems to play crucial roles in the reactivity of the cementitious system and strength development of the binder. This finding was corroborated by De Vargas et al. [113] who reported that SiO2=Na2O played a major role in CS development, morphology and microstructure of FA-based geopolymer system. Their results revealed an increase in CS with increasing molar ratio, increasing curing age and increasing curing temperature. For SCM-controlled activation, addition of 5% SF to replace slag improved CS up to 800 °C in AAS pastes [114]. Owing to its dilution effect and pozzolanic reactivity, addition of 5–10% RHA to replace cement was useful in the consumption of free lime, formation of additional C-S-H resulting in increased CS [115]. In another study, RHA addition in SF UHPC resulted in improved impermeability and increased CS of 9.76%, 14.5% and 10.02% at 3, 28 and 120 days [116]. Addition of nanosilica (NS) enhanced the structural perfor- mance of FA-based GPC through the geopolymerization transfor- mation of the amorphous phase of GPC to crystalline phase without the need for thermal activation. 4. Production of green concrete Production methods of green concrete differ depending on the constituent materials to be utilized and the intended application. In order to produce sustainable, green concrete with sufficient workability, Müller et al. [117] suggested four basic steps namely: I. Determining experimentally the relevant properties of the selected concrete constituents II. Determine the water/cement ratio based on desired cement content and strength requirements III. Optimize the grain size distribution of granular constituent IV. Production and evaluation of the fresh concrete properties based on achieved packing density and prediction compres- sive strength Optimization methods which can be applied in green concrete include particle packing optimization using granular optimization of all concrete constituent [117,118], statistical optimization using microanalysis data and estimation of C-S-H contents [119], step- by-step optimization method [120,121]. Other optimization methods include micro-proportioning opti- mization of fines grading [122], particle size distribution method [123], multi-objective simultaneous optimization using response surface methodology (RSM) [124], box-behnken response surface technique [125], response surface methodology using design- expert software [126] and multicriteria optimization method for the technical, economic and environmental aspects of green con- crete [127]. The advantages of optimization in green concrete include min- imization of air voids leading to attainment of maximum strength, synergistic maximization of the properties of the constituent mate- rials. In addition, for ternary blended cement concrete, Binici et al. [128] suggested separately grinding each of the SCM constituents to obtain higher compressive strengths. 5. Properties of green concrete 5.1. Fresh properties 5.1.1. Slump and water requirement Slump test indicates the behavior of compacted concrete cone under the action of gravitational force, which can also be seen as a measure of the consistency or wetness of the concrete mix [129]. In order to produce HVFAC, Bentz et al. [130] recommended optimum mixture proportioning and careful selection, evaluation and combination of HRWRA (high-range water-reducing admix- tures) alongside increasing aggregate volume fraction. Alaka and Oyedele [131] obtained good workable HVFAC at low water- binder ratio with superabundant dosage of superplasticizer (SP). Yijin et al. [132] and Mukherjee et al. [133] recorded increase in slump values with increasing fly ash replacements of cement, which was attributed to high specific surface area and low specific gravity of fly ash compared to Portland cement. For rice husk ash (RHA), Keertana and Gobhiga [134] reported decrease in slump with increasing RHA while Abalaka [135] recorded increased slump up to 5% cement replacement with RHA and decrease thereafter. For SF, Hunchate et al. [136] recorded increasing slump up to 10% silica fume (SF) cement replacements and decline thereafter while Amarkhail [137] obtained reduction in slump values with up to 15% SF replacement of cement. With respect to GGBFS, Karri et al. [138] and Arivalagan [139] reported increase in slump values with increase in GGBFS contents. Tamila- rasan et al. [129] reported optimum slump value of 55% GGBFS replacement levels for grade 20 and grade 25 concretes. The decrease in slump values was attributed to the high water absorp- tion of RHA and often SP is added to enhance workability of RHA in concrete. Slump reduction is attributed to the high specific surface area of the RHA and SF and high water absorption capacity as a result of their macro-mesoporous nature and the concrete pore volume [140]. Their slump reduction potential depends on their level of reactivity and activation, level of fineness and water-cement ratio and cement replacement ratio [140,141]. Abalaka [135] also men- tioned that each SCM has its own optimum w=b ratio which would give it its maximum reactivity. In addition, RHA had higher yield stress and viscosity than SF and its particle shape is angular while that of SF is spherical [140]. As a result, in their study, RHA exhib- ited lower mini-slump flow compared to compared to SF. In another study, SF exhibited higher flow compared to unground RHA and was attributed to its spherical particle shape, its ability to release adsorbed water from its microstructure and the amount of fine particles it contains [142]. For waste glass, while Malik et al. [143] and Liang et al. [144] reported increasing slump values at increasing waste glass replace- ments of fine aggregate, Abdallah and Fan [145] reported decline in slump values. The contrasting views may be due to the different concrete mix ratios used, the physical properties of the concrete constituents and the replacement levels investigated. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1069
- 9. 5.1.2. Setting time,flow, workability, segregation index, bleeding Setting time determines the time available for transport, plac- ing and compaction of cement/cementitious-based materials [146]. The authors reported that the setting time of GGBFS-based geopolymers vary with the calcium content, particle size and Si=Al molar ratios. The initial setting time (IST) and final setting time (FST) they obtained were 109–141 min and 155–327 min. Bouzoubaa and Lachemi [147] reported that for FA-based SCC ini- tial and final setting times ranged from 4:50–7:45 to 6:30–10:15 h and were found to be 3–4 h longer than control. Brooks et al. [148] reported that there is no linear relationship between setting times and SCM percentage replacement owing to the influence of several factors. In terms of difference between FST and IST, SF results were found comparable to OPC and preferable to FA and GGBS. Ravina and Mehta [149] reported delay in IST and FST from 20 min to 4 h 20 min and 1 h – 5 h 15 min in concrete depending on the type and amount of FA utilized. The delay in setting time was influenced by the sulphate and available alkali contents of FA. Nochaiya et al. [150] reported IST and FST values of 145– 170 min and 215–235 min for Portland-FA cement pastes respec- tively. Inclusion of SF increased the IST but led to reduction of the FST at increasing SF contents from 5 to 10%. Ikpong and Okpala [141] reported improvement in cohesive- ness and flowability of RHA-modified concrete containing 30% RHA replacement of cement. The IST increased from 2 h to 3.5 h while the FST increased from 4 h to 4.5 h respectively. Lin et al. [151] reported that WG recorded IST and FST values of 666– 1158 min and 765–1245 for increasing replacements of MK from 10 to 40%. Likewise, Wang [152] observed reduction in IST and FST with increasing WG powder content of up to 50% cement replacement in mortar at 0:485 w=b ratio. Combination of coarse and fine WG resulted in longer IST and FST as well as higher slump values. WG was recommended because of its impermeability, enhanced flow properties and higher strength at elevated temperatures. Also, Bouzoubaa and Lachemi [147] reported that FA-based SCC exhibit good deformability and stability. Increase in flow time was observed with decrease in water content. Segregation index was found to decrease with increasing FA content but increased with SP dosage. A w=cm ratio of 0.45 was recommended to obtain segregation-resistant FA-SCC. Shen [153] reported that smaller aggregate size, continuous aggregate gradation, lower aggregate density and higher paste viscosity and yield stress reduce dynamic segregation. According to Xie et al. [154], Fresh SCC made with UPFA (ultra- pulverized fly ash) must meet the following requirements: 240– 270 mm slump, slump flow of 600–750 and L-box flow velocity (VL) of 35–80 m/s. When the VL is 80 m=s, the viscosity is too high to resist segregation and when it is 35 m/s, the viscosity is too high to attain self-compacting. In order to produce HSSCC with UPFA, the following were recommended: fineness of 500– 600 m2 =kg, UPFA content of 30–40%, total SCM content P 500 kg=m3 , minimum sand ratio of 40% and appropriate water content at optimum SP content. In addition, a low yield stress, moderate viscosity and retention of kinetic energy of the flowable mix by reducing the coarse aggregate fraction is essential to achieve required fluidity, segregation resistance and prevent inter- particle collision and blocking. Rahman et al. [155] reported that RHA produced from uncon- trolled burning can be utilized in low-cost housing construction project. The RHA concrete up to 40% exhibited sieve segregation of 0.04–8.2%, slump flow of 580–670 mm, passing abilities of 5.9–7 s (v-funnel) and 3.5–5.2 which met the requirements of SCC. Wu et al. [156] reported utilization of fly ash as viscous mod- ifier in production of self-compacting LWC with good workability. The concrete exhibited segregation ratio (SR) of 4.4–5.6% and aggregate segregation index (Iseg) of 2.9–4.2%, both of which are 15% specified for SCC. In addition, Yazıcı [157] obtained lower slump flow at 30% and 40% cement replacements compared to SF, higher slump flow at 50% cement replacement and equal slump flow at 60% cement replacement. The slump flow values for FA and SF vary from 750–800 mm to 765–825 mm respectively. Bingöl and Tohumcu [158] showed that FA achieved better fill- ing and passing ability in self-compacting concrete (SCC) compared to SF. Based on their slump flow values, FA-based SCC could be used for normal applications such as walls and columns while the SF-based SCC can be utilized in slightly-reinforced concrete structures. Ternary and quaternary SCMs were also found to improve the filling and passing ability of self-compacting concrete and met all the EFNARC requirements [159]. Workability is the ease of handling, placing, compacting and finishing fresh concrete [104]. The authors demonstrated that workability of GPC reduced with inclusion of GGBFS and FA and reduction of activator to binder owing to accelerated reaction of calcium and angular and spherical shapes of GGBFS and FA parti- cles. Duval and Kadri [160] recommended 10% SF as the maximum replacement for cement without affecting workability of SFC. Msinjili et al. [161] reported that workability of fresh concrete can be improved with the aid of polycarboxylate ethers and ligno- sulphonate while Karthik et al. [162] recommended the use of bio- additives. Improved workability and prolonged setting time were observed in their applications. Ismail and Waliuddin [163] reported good workability of concrete with finely ground 20% RHA replacement of cement and hard workability at 30% RHA. On the other hand, Khatri et al. [48] reported that SF marginally decreased workability of concrete but contributed significantly to improved mechanical properties. The properties of fresh cement pastes and concrete is affected by hot weather conditions [164]. Likewise, IST and FST decreases with curing temperature increase. Ujhelyi and Ibrahim [165] men- tioned that the use of 40% GGBS along with ground tuff (a natural pozzolana) up to 20% was useful in preserving the properties of concrete during hot-weather concreting conditions. For WGC, slump flow, flow ratio and v-funnel increased with increasing WG content [166]. Slump flow values of 670–880 mm, 670–740 mm, and 670–780 were obtained at increasing cement contents of 350 kg=m3 , 400 kg=m3 and 450 kg=m3 . Vinai et al. [167] recommended water-solid ratio range of 0.37– 0.41 and binder content 400 kg=m3 to avoid fast initial concrete setting and significant strength reduction. Boukendakdji et al. [168] recommended polycarboxylate-based SP to improve worka- bility of SCC at optimum GGBFS content of 15%. The authors advised that care should be taken in the use of mineral additives owing to their tendency to reduce early strength when used as cement replacement. Bleeding is the movement of water to the surface of freshly placed concrete and is noticeable when surface water exists on fresh concrete surface [169]. The negative effects of bleeding include variable concrete properties. According to Wainwright and Ait-Aider [170], bleeding is influenced largely by the particle size distribution of cement, fine content in concrete mix as well as cement reactivity. The authors reported similar bleeding between combination of 40% GGBS + 60% OPC and 100% OPC. 5.2. Hard properties 5.2.1. Compressive strength In order to enhance easy comparison, the compressive strength (CS) results obtained by different researchers for different green 1070 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 10. concrete were plottedin Fig. 8 while the materials used were given in Table 1. The three highest CS of 92.1 MPa, 80 MPa and 79 MPa were achieved using SF + ns, SF only and RHA after 90 curing days [39,171]. SF was corroborated by Benaicha et al. [172] to produce high CS of 82.9 MPa after 28 days curing age. Addition of lime to HVFAC and cement to GPC (geopolymer con- crete) were shown to aid their CS development [59]. Low CS were recorded with geopolymers produced with alkali activators which was attributed to their high Si=Al ratio [17,173]. Hwang and Huynh [17] noted that the development of compressive strength depends on appropriate combination of NaOH concentration and RHA content. Kumar and Gupta [174] recorded CS of 0.2 MPa with Ca/Si ratio of 0.106, Shatat [175] reported CS of 63.7 MPa at Ca=Si ratio of 0.89 while Chindaprasirt et al. [173] recorded 38 MPa with Ca=Si ratio of 7.98 and 0.026 before and after geopolymerisation. Thus, it can be inferred that high CS is obtained at intermediate Ca=Si between 0.85 and 1.0. Therefore, it is suggested that chemically complimen- tary waste materials should be utilized in blended concrete appli- cations to achieve optimum results. 5.2.2. Flexural strength Flexural strength results obtained by various researchers for green concrete differs as depicted in Fig. 9 while the materials were shown in Table 2. The highest flexural strength of 10:97 N=mm2 was obtained by Mohseni et al. [176] with quarternary system of Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPO, followed by Patil and Sangle [177] who utilized Cement + 20% FA + 1.5% Steel fibres + water reducing admixture and then Sathawane et al. [178] who used ternary sys- tem of Cement + Fly ash + RHA. The lowest flexural strength was recorded by Walczak et al. [179] with waste glass. Differences in their flexural strengths can be attributed to dif- ferences in the concrete mix design, pre-loading condition, com- pressive strength, SCM and aggregate materials utilized. Fibre-reinforced mortar containing RHA, nano-alumina, and polypropylene fibres (PPF) obtained the highest flexural strength. The high flexural strength was attributed to the presence of PPF, which improved the ductility of the mortar by providing bridging action, which enhanced the fracture energy and consequently flex- ural strength of the mortar. On the other hand, the nano-Al2O3 (NA) enhanced the load transfer from the matrix to the fibre. These syn- ergistic interactions were responsible for the high flexural strength of the fibre reinforced mortar. Similar effect was observed in pre- stressed steel fibre-reinforced concrete beams, which obtained the second highest flexural strength. This implies presence of fibres enhances the energy absorption capacity of concrete structures and consequently their flexural strength. Enhancement of flexural strength of concrete by nano-Al2O3, polypropylene and steel fibres was also corroborated by other studies [180–182]. Concrete mortar containing waste glass (CRT) and fluidized fly ash recorded the least flexural strength. This concrete mixture lacked the benefits of the bridging action of the fibres as well as load –transfer benefits caused by nano-alumina. 5.2.3. Splitting tensile strength and modulus of elasticity Splitting tensile strength (STS) obtained by different researchers were displayed in Fig. 10. The highest STS of 5:3 N=mm2 was obtained by Jalal et al. [39] with SF and NS followed by 5:07 N=mm2 obtained using waste glass [86]. FA-blended cements recorded low splitting tensile strength (STS) which was linked to reduction in the quality of the ITZ [57] and in order to meet the minimum requirements for use in struc- tural lightweight concrete, Kockal and Ozturan [126] recom- 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Compressivestrengthatdifferentcuringdays (MPa) Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete 7 28 90 Fig. 8. Compressive strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized in green concrete. Table 1 Materials utilized in different green concrete in Fig. 8. Author(s) Waste materials used as SCM Type of green concrete/mortar Çakır and Sofyanlı [37] SF + RAC Recycled aggregate concrete Jalal et al. [39] SF + NS HPSCC Xu et al. [171] RHA 30 min RHA blended paste Xu et al. [171] SF RHA blended paste Xu et al. [171] Raw RHA RHA blended paste Mohseni et al. [176] Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPO Fiber-reinforced mortar Mohseni et al. [176] RHA only Fiber-reinforced mortar Yang et al. [207] RHA + BOFS RHA-based composite Bog˘a et al. [213] GGBFS + CNI GGBFS modified concrete FA50 L HVFAC Aliabdo et al. [86] 25%addition of waste glass powder (45 MPa cement) Glass powder mortar Aliabdo et al. [86] 25%cement replacement with WG powder (45 MPa cement) Glass powder mortar K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1071
- 11. mended curing periodbetween 50 and 90 days. Benaicha et al. [172] observed increase in modulus of elasticity (MOE) in SF- modified concrete with increasing SF contents while Tatikonda [183] recommended optimum RHA content of 5% to obtain maxi- mum MOE irrespective of the cement/concrete grade used as dis- played in Fig. 11. In addition, Chik et al. [184] reported increase in MOE with increasing rice husk content and recommended 15% optimum RHA cement replacement which also gave the highest compressive strength of 6:70 N=mm2 . Siddique and Kaur [185] reported that MOE reduced with increasing elevated temperatures but increased with GGBFS content as displayed in Fig. 12. Abdallah and Fan [145] observed increase in MOE with curing age and with increased waste glass content in concrete which was attributed to the higher MOE of waste glass compared to natural glass. 5.2.4. Shrinkage and creep Rovnaník et al. [186] reported increased shrinkage with increased brick powder waste content because of the high water absorption of brick powder waste as shown in Fig. 13. Kayali [187] reported 33% reduction in shrinkage with fly ash aggregate as well as 22% reduction in weight and 20% increase in strength. This implies fly ash aggregate can be utilized in the production of stronger and lighter green concrete with reduced transportation costs especially for precast elements. Also, results by Haranki [188] revealed that care must be taken in the selection and prepa- ration of aggregate to be utilized in green concrete to minimize shrinkage in green concrete. According to Serdar et al. [189], the four major types of shrink- age are plastic shrinkage, carbonation shrinkage, autogenous 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Flexuralstrengthatdifferentcuringdays(MPa) Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete 7 28 90 Fig. 9. Flexural strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized in green concrete. Table 2 Materials utilized in different green concrete in Fig. 9. Author(s) Waste materials used as SCM Type of green concrete/mortar Jalal et al. [39] SF + NS HPSCC Mohseni et al. [176] Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPF Fiber-reinforced mortar Mohseni et al. [176] RHA only Fiber-reinforced mortar Yang et al. [207] RHA + BOF RHA-based composite Benaicha et al. [172] Cement + Limestone filler + SF30 Self-compacting concrete Benaicha et al. [172] Cement + Limestone filler Self-compacting concrete Sathawane et al. [178] 22.5%FA + 7.5%RHA RHA + FA modified concrete Walczak et al. [179] Cement + CRT80%+20%FFA + Expanded clay Waste glass concrete Walczak et al. [179] Cement + CRT100%+Expanded clay Waste glass concrete Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 1.5%Steel fibres Prestressed steel fibre reinforced concrete beam Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 1.5%Steel fibres Non- Prestressed steel fibre reinforced concrete beam Patil and Sangle [177] Cement + 20%FA + 0%Steel fibres Prestressed plain concrete beam Karri et al. [138] GGBFS40% (M40) GGBFS concrete Karri et al. [138] GGBFS40% (M20) GGBFS concrete 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SF+RAC SF+NS WG addiƟon WG FA+RHA GGBFS GGBFS Spliƫngtensilestrengthatdifferent curingdays(N/mm2) Different SCMs uƟlized in green concrete 7 28 90 Fig. 10. Splitting tensile strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized in green concrete. 1072 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 12. shrinkage and dryingshrinkage. While the first two were caused by poor curing and carbonation, the last two were caused by drying and moisture loss. Creep is induced significantly by internal rela- tive humidity (IRH) and increased with increasing RHA content in concrete [190]. Addition of 10% SF was suggested to minimize shrinkage and cracking potential of UHPC [191]. 15% RHA was rec- ommended for optimum creep reduction. Creep reduction of 5560% can be achieved using HVFA of 55–65% fly ash content [192]. Barrett et al. [193] suggested the use of pre-wetted LWAs in HVFAC to induce internal curing effect resulting in improved early-age strength as well as reduction in autogenous shrinkage and tensile stresses. Atisß [194] stated that high strength HVFAC with lower shrinkage compared to OPC and lower water consump- tion can be utilized in construction of road pavement and large industrial floors. Ling [195] recommended the use of limewater and ultra-fine fly ash to augment the low-strength development of HVFAC. Drying shrinkage has a non-linear relationship with ambient relative humidity (RH) [196]. The authors also reported that aggre- gate grading and maximum aggregate size affects shrinkage strain. The non-linear relationship grows with increasing aggregate size. Drying shrinkage strain of ambient-cured specimens were com- pared to heat-cured specimens [197]. Serdar et al. [189] recommended the utilization of quaternary cement blends (FA, slag limestone) to obtain shrinkage and creep deformation similar to CEM II cement and to minimize negative impact of binary SCMs in concrete. In addition, Wallah and Rangan [197] reported that the specific creep of FA-based GPC was that of Portland cement concrete (PCC) because of block-polymerisation concept. The concept describes the behaviour of the fly ash atoms which acts as micro-aggregates in the system resulting in the increase in the creep resistance of FA-based GPC compared to PCC. The specific creep was observed to reduce with CS. This rela- tionship was also reported by Folliard et al. [198]. The authors also mentioned that early age creep tends to be higher than at later ages. Wallah [199] reported that creep strain, creep coefficient and specific creep of FA-based GPC decreased with increasing CS. High creep strains were observed at early ages of HVFAC because of slow strength development [62,200]. The low creep strains of HVFAC was attributed to the ‘micro-aggregate effect’ of the unreacted FA remaining in the concrete. As much as 50% creep reduction was reported by combined effect of SP and HVFA [201]. Strain due to both creep and shrinkage is due to removal of adsorbed water, applied stress, pore refinement and increase in fine pores, and improvement in microstructure of the ITZ [48]. SF decreased specific creep at all ages and long-term drying shrinkage as well. Gifford and Ward [202] reported that fly ash reduces creep by increasing the elastic modulus and contributing to the total aggre- gate as well as reduction of paste volume. Yuan and Cook [203] reported high creep strain at high cement replacements with fly ash while Lohtia et al. [204] recommended 15%FA replacement of cement as optimum for strength, elasticity, shrinkage and creep. Contrary to literatures, Klausen et al. [205] observed that FAC of 17% and 33% FA contents exhibited similar compressive and tensile creep behaviour throughout the hardening phase. In addition, the specific creep development was found to increase with fly ash content. Since water plays a crucial role in creep mechanism, addition of SF is useful in restricting moisture movement [191]. However, the authors reported that there is no interaction between creep and shrinkage. According to Forth [206], tensile creep is about 2–3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 ModulusofelasƟcityfordifferent concretegrade(GPa) Rice husk ash content (%) 60 80 100 Fig. 11. Modulus of elasticity for different concrete grades of RHA-modified concrete [183]. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 20 40 60 ReducƟoninModulusofelasƟcityat differentelevatedtemperature(%) GGBFS cement replacement (%) 100 200 300 Fig. 12. Reduction in modulus of elasticity at different elevated temperature (°C) at different GGBFS content [185]. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 04:00 03:01 1.5:1.5 00:04 Shrinkage(%) Fly ash/Brick powder raƟo Fig. 13. Effects of brick powder content on shrinkage [186]. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1073
- 13. times greater thancompressive creep and that both are affected by relative humidity. The author also reported that ultimate tensile creep has a decreasing non-linear relationship with compressive strength for different applied stresses and that the presence of microcracks in the ITZ enhances tensile creep. 5.3. Durability properties 5.3.1. Water absorption and porosity Yang et al. [207] recommended a maximum cement replace- ment levels 6 60% in order to avoid adverse impact on the perfor- mance of the concrete as a result of increased water demand of the SCM. It was also noted that water absorption of ternary blends cement comprising RHA and BOF produced by Yang et al. [207] was less than that of ternary blend derived from fly ash and lime- stone by Shafigh et al. [57]. Parghi and Alam [208] observed that water absorption reduced with increase in recycled glass powder content while bulk density decreases. Aliabdo et al. [59] reported that cement addition caused decrease in both water absorption and porosity of GPC as revealed in Fig. 14. In another study by Aliabdo et al. [86], water absorption and voids ratio was found to reduce with increase in waste glass pow- der addition as a result of the pore filling and pozzolanic action of waste glass powder. Investigation by Binici [209] revealed that water absorption reduces with increase in alkali activation temper- ature but the reduction exhibited differs from one material to another as depicted in Fig. 15. Tian and Zhang [210] reported that water absorption and apparent porosity varies with different curing ages and fly ash- cement ratios as displayed in Figs. 16 and 17. This implies that SCM-cement ratio, the apparent porosity and water absorption of the SCM used in a green concrete affects their mechanical perfor- mance. Hesami et al. [21] also reported decrease in porosity with increase in RHA combined with PPS, glass and steel fibres irrespec- tive of water-cement ratio and recommended optimum RHA con- tent of between 8 and 10% and water-cement ratio of 0.33. Momtazi and Zanoosh [211] reported that waste rubber tire and polypropylene fibre (PPF) can be used to reduce water absorption of RHA-cement composite. 5.3.2. Chloride penetration and alkali silica reaction (ASR) Siddique et al. [212] reported improved resistance to chloride penetration with bacterial rice husk ash concrete (BRHAC) com- pared to results obtained by Bog˘a et al. [213] as shown in Fig. 18 and recommended 10% RHA replacement of cement as optimum value. Gastaldini et al. [34] revealed that lower chloride penetra- tion was obtained at lower water/cement ratio of 0.5 compared to 0.65 and that chloride penetration control of RHA was higher compared to SF (see Fig. 19). Parghi and Alam [208] recommended inclusion of 25% recycled glass particle of size 300 lm in combination with 10% FA+ 10% SF to make superior mortar with ASR expansion 10% specified by ASTM C1260. Abdallah and Fan [145] reported increased reduction in ASR expansion with increased waste glass content as natural sand replacement with curing age. This occurrence was attributed to reduction in available alkali due to the consumption of lime by the silica in the finely grounded waste glass. SF was also observed to exhibit about 40% and 14.3% chloride penetration resistance more than RHA at the same cement replace- ment ratio of 5% and 10% and w=b ratio of 0.6 and 3 days curing age [34]. Chloride penetration resistance of 11.9% and 50% for RHA and 52.4% and 64.3% for SF at 5% and 10% cement replacements respec- tively were recorded at 91 days–3 days curing age. Hassan et al. [214] reported that SF achieved lowest chloride penetration compared to FA and OPC at both early ages but compa- rable characteristics with SF at long-term ages. In HPC, SF was found to contribute more to permeability reduction (87%) and pore reduction (25%) than CS. Rostami and Behfarnia [215] reported chloride penetration resistance of 26.7%, 38.5% and 49.6% at 5%, 10% and 15% SF replacement of cement. Zareei et al. [216] achieved 78.4% reduction in chloride penetra- tion in HPC containing 25% RHA replacement of cement and 10% microsilica from 4306 Coulumbs to 928 Coulombs. [157] achieved 52.36% reduction in chloride penetration from 19 mm to 9.5 mm through the use of HVFA SCC containing 60% FA and 10% SF. They reported that concrete cover of 20 mm concrete cover is not suffi- cient to protect steel reinforcement from chloride ingress even in high quality SCC. Matos and Sousa-Coutinho [217] reported that SF and WG were effective in reduction of ASR. A reduction of 76.85% reduction was achieved at 20% WG content. Waste glass powder also achieved 52.47% reduction in chloride diffusion in mortar. An optimum of 10% WG content was recommended to achieve best durability properties [152]. Siddique and Bennacer [169] reported improved chloride bind- ing capacity with increasing GGBS content but it is affected by the presence of sulfates. Cheng et al. [218] reported 81.9% chloride penetration resistance using 60% GGBS replacement of cement at w/cm ratio of 0.55 from 10271coulombs to 1864 coulombs. The improvement in chloride penetration resistance was attributed to pore refinement and densification of the concrete system. Cracking potential can be minimized by limiting unrestrained shrinkage of concrete mixtures [219]. Their results showed that FA exhibited the greatest drying shrinkage compared to nanosilica and GGBS cement. Also, chloride penetration was observed to reduce with increasing curing age, increasing cement replacements 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0% 5% 10% 15% WaterabsorpƟon(%) Porosity(%) Cement addiƟon to Geopolymer concrete (%) WA Porosity Fig. 14. Effects of cement addition in geopolymer concrete [59]. 1074 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 14. with RHA andSF but reduced with increasing w/b ratio. Balapour et al. [220] reported that combination of nano-RHA (2.5%) and micro-RHA (12.5%) produced the best chloride penetration resis- tance. In fact, their combination achieved chloride penetration resistance of 71.2% at 90 days compared to control. This value was higher than 36.2% recorded by 2.5% nano-RHA utilized alone. From the results above, it seems the order of preference in terms of resistance to chloride penetration is GGBS RHA SF FA WG. However, experiments are required to check or confirm this order of preference for chloride penetration resistance using the same experimental conditions such as similar cement replace- ment levels, w/cm ratio, curing age at testing, amongst others for accurate comparison purposes. Alkali silica reaction is a concrete durability problem where sil- ica forms in aggregates react with alkali pore solutions to form expansive reaction products, resulting in deleterious concrete cracking [221]. Effectiveness of any SCM to mitigate ASR depends on the SCM composition (SiO2 and alkali content), SCM %, type of alkali aggregate reaction, type and fineness of alkali-contents of cement [222]. SCMs reduce ASR through pozzolanic reaction which 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 GGBFS Fly ash Silica sand Pumice WaterabsorpƟon(%)atdifferent acƟvaƟontemperature Different materials used as alkali acƟvators 100 150 Fig. 15. Water absorption for different materials at varied activation temperatures (°C) [209]. 0 5 10 15 20 25 28 days 3 months 6 months 10 months WaterabsorpƟonatdifferentfly ash-cementraƟos(%) Water curing ages 1.2 1.6 2 Fig. 16. Water absorption of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and fly ash-cement ratios [210]. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 days 3 months 6 months 10 months Apparentporosityatdifferentflyash- cementraƟos(%) Water curing age 1.2 1.6 2 Fig. 17. Apparent porosity of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and fly ash-cement ratios [210]. 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 RHAC BRHAC GGBFS+CNI GGBFS+CNI GGBFS Rapidchloridepermeabilityatdifferent curingdays(Coulombs) Different SCMs used in green concrete 7 28 56 90 Fig. 18. Rapid chloride penetration at different curing days for different SCMs. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0% 30% 40% 50% Compressivestrengthatdifferent curingages,differentconcretegrades differentacidsoluƟons(N/mm2) GGBFS replacement of cement 28M40H2SO4 28M40HCl 28M20H2SO4 28M20HCl 90M40H2SO4 90M40HCl 90M20H2SO4 90M20HCl Fig. 19. Compressive strength at different GGBFS cement replacements, different curing age, different grades of concrete in different acid solutions [138]. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1075
- 15. reduces concrete permeabilityand ASR consumption of available alkali ions [223]. According to Christopher et al. [221], contrary views were pre- sented concerning the effects of RHA on ASR in concrete. While Hasparyk et al. [224] recommended between 12 and 15% of RHA to control ASR, Le [225] reported that RHA contributes to ASR by acting as micro-reactive aggregate to produce expansive ASR prod- ucts. This contradiction was resolved by Zerbino et al. [226] who reported that RHA can inhibit or promote ASR depending on its particle size. Therefore, the authors recommended careful selection of cement, equipment and mixing cycle, as well as adaptation of the mixing process. In another study which spanned three years, they observed stable mechanical properties at alkali contents (Na2O) 3 kg=m3 . Their results were corroborated in another study which revealed that RHA produced through controlled incin- eration exhibited stronger ASR inhibition effect compared to resid- ual RHA produced via uncontrolled burning [227]. ASR reductions of 51.4% and 83.8% were obtained at 10 and 20% CRHA (RHA from controlled burning) while reductions of 2.7%, 37.8%, 70.3% and 94.6% were produced at 10% 20%, 30% and 40% RRHA (RHA from uncontrolled burning) cement replacements in mortar bars at w/ cm ratio of 0.47. Le [225] reported that SF was more effective than RHA in miti- gating ASR expansion in mortar. The suggested the use of RHA of fine particle size 5.7 lm to mitigate ASR expansion. At 20% cement replacement with SF, FA, WG, CRHA and RRHA, the ASR expansion obtained were 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.02%, 0.06% and 0.23%, which corresponded to percentage reductions of 88.9%, 66%, 83.8% and 37.8% for FA, WG, CRHA and RRHA [64,88,227]. Furthermore, Oberholster and Westra [228] reported that SF performed better than FA in mitigating ASR. At 20% cement replacement, they obtained ASR values of 0:03%, 0:02% and 0.2 for SF, FA and cement. These results correspond to ASR reductions of 85% and 65% respectively with reference to the control, which lends credence to the superiority of SF over FA in mitigating ASR. In another study, Buck [229] recorded ASR values of 0:15% and 0.47 at 30% GGBS cement replacement and 0% (control), which corresponds to ASR reduction of 68:1%. Therefore, from the results above, it seems the ranking of the SCMs in terms of ASR mitigation is SF FA CRHA GGBS WG RRHA. Nevertheless, confirma- tory laboratory and field investigations are required to confirm this order of ranking. Lindgård et al. [230] mentioned that SCMs low in calcium and high in silica are the most effective in reducing pore solution alka- linity and consequently ASR expansion. The authors called for reli- able methods for satisfactory, accelerated and affordable testing methods that resembles field conditions such as humidity, alkali content and temperature. ASR expansion was reported to decrease in concrete when WG was utilized as fine aggregates as a result of reduction of available lime [88]. ASR reductions of 66%, 41:7% and 16:7%were obtained at 20%, 15% and 10%WG replacement of fine aggregate. ASR expansion was investigated between 25 and 100% cement replacements [231] and was found to depend on WG content and glass colour. They recommended the use of FA and Li2CO3 for reduction of ASR expansion. In contrast, Özkan and Yüksel [232] mentioned that glass colour does not have significant influence on both ASR and elevated temperature resistance. They advocated the utilization of FA and GGBFS to reduce ASR expansion. 5.3.3. Fire-resistance and chemical attack properties Karri et al. [138] investigated the effects of chemical acid attack on GGBFS modified concrete at different curing ages using two grades of concrete (20 and 40 MPa). CS increased for some of the concrete as shown in Fig. 13 and may be due to chemical reactions of the acid with the GGBFS and other concrete constituents. It was suggested that GGBFS cement replacement should not exceed 40% with respect to durability considerations and that the acid seems to promote pozzolanic reactions in the GGBFS modified concrete. SF had considerable influence on residual CS at 300°C. Strength retention was 84:1%, 85:2%, 68:8% and 26:8% at 10% SF replacement of cement in SFC, at elevated temperatures of 100, 200, 300 and 400°C. Their strength retention was greater than the corresponding values of 84:1%, 85:2%, 68:8% and 26:8% exhib- ited at 6% cement replacement [233]. The strength loss was attrib- uted to weakening of the ITZ weakening of the bonding between aggregate and paste and chemical decomposition of hydration products. Also, strength recovery of 1.3–3.7% was observed at 200 °C. in all the concretes. Bernal et al. [234] reported strength retention of 94:5%, 60:9%, and 47:3%, for SF and 103:6%, 46:4%, and 48:2%, for RHA at 200 °C., 400 °C and 600 °C. The results showed that SF exhibited higher strength retention than RHA. Only RHA-based system retained measurable strength after 800 °C. Rashad [235] reported CS of 45.92 MPa for HVFAC at 70% FA replacement of cement and 400 °C., which was lower compared to 67 MPa and 52 MPa for SF and RHA in alkali-activated pastes reported by Bernal et al. [234] at the same temperature. In addi- tion, increase in CS was observed at 400 °C in all the mixtures and was attributed to the densification of the matrix. The increas- ing strength loss recorded from 400 to 1000 °C. was attributed to loss of water, increasing porosity and permeability. In addition, HVFAC exhibited better fire performance compared to neat con- crete while inclusion of GGBS showed negative effects on CS at ele- vated temperature. FA-GP showed low thermal stability at elevated temperatures between 800 and 1000 °C, which was attributed to increase in average pore size and replacement of amorphous structure with crystalline Na-feldspars [98]. The Class F fly ash-based GP prepared using Na activator recorded CS of 30 MPa, 33 MPa, 37 MPa, 38 MPa, 14 MPa and 12 MPa at 200 °C, 400 °C, 600 °C, 800 °C, 1000 °C and 1200 °C respectively. On the other hand, FA-GP prepared using potassium silicate exhibited deterioration of CS after 1000 °C, while the amorphous structure remained. This demonstrates that Class F fly ash-based GP materials cannot be utilized in refractory insulation applications as a result of the large reductions in CS and high shrinkage between 800 °C and 1200 °C. HSC made with SF ð15:4%Þ and FA (38:5% of cement content) experienced CS reduction of 74:4% from 97.3 MPa to 24.9 MPa at elevated temperature of 800 °C [236]. On the other hand, normal concrete (NC) showed 54:7% reduction in CS at the same temper- ature. The deterioration in both HSC and NC was linked to variation in the pore structure. HSC containing 9% SF wt. of cement recorded CS marginal strength loss between 100 and 400 °C and significant loss between 55 and 80% after 400 °C [237]. Janotka and Nürnbergerová [238] reported strength deterioration between 100 and 200 °C in HSC with SF content of 7:53% by wt of cement at w=c ratio of 0.32 and was linked to pore-structure coarsening. Kong et al. [239] reported that FA-GP pastes recorded 6% strength increase at CS of 62.8 MPa and 11% mass loss at elevated temperature of 800 °C, compared to unexposed specimens. The CS increase was attributed to the low moisture loss, presence of high proportion of micropores and high solid-to-liquid ratio. Reported that fly ash-to-activator ratio is the most critical parameter for fire resistance and strength development in GPs and suggested optimum combination of Na2SiO3=KOH of 2.5 and FA=activator of 2.5. Increase in strength of GPs at elevated temper- atures was attributed to both polymerization reaction and sinter- ing. In another study, Kong and Sanjayan [240] revealed that 1076 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 16. aggregate size andtheir rate of expansion are influential parame- ters which affect the performance of GPC ate elevated temperature. While small aggregates (10 mm) promote spalling and extensive cracking, large aggregates (10 mm) were observed to be stable. Pan et al. [241] reported 15% strength loss at temperatures 500 and 56% between 500 and 800 °C in fine glass powder mor- tar. The strength loss was attributed to reduction in calcium hydroxide (CH) in GP mortar, softening of glass content and higher incompatibility between paste and sand particles. Poon et al. [242] reported that PFA (pulverized FA) followed by GGBS exhibited better performance at elevated temperature com- pared to SF in concrete and could be utilized where there is high risk of fire. Optimum cement replacements of cement by FA and GGBS in HSC and NSC to retain maximum strength and durability were 30% and 40% respectively [242]. In contrast, SFC with more than 5% cement replacement should be avoided because of explosive spalling. Based on the results, the order of preference in terms of CS per- formance at elevated temperature was FA GGBS SF. Average strength loss were 44% and 60% in FA- and SF-based HSC and GGBS-based NSC. Rashad et al. [243] reported increasing residual strength at ele- vated temperatures when GGBS was used as sand replacements in AAS (alkali activated slag) mortar. Residual strength losses obtained at 800 °C were 33:45%, 51:91%, 69:49%, and 90%, at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%, replacement of sand respectively. Also, enhancement in residual strength at 200 and 400 °C were 19:31%, 79:26%, 89:73%, and 100:95%, and 20:89%, 64:28%, 71:86%, and 82:58%, at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%, replacement of sand respec- tively. No micro-crack was found in the AAS mortar throughout all the elevated temperature tests. Tanyildizi and Coskun [244] investigated LWC incorporating 0, 10, 20, and 30% FA replacement of cement at elevated temperature of 200, 400 and 800 °C. CS ranges of 38–48 MPa, 35–38 MPa and 14–23 MPa were recorded at 200, 400 and 800 °C. The percentage retained strength obtained ranges from 91.09–98.95%, 80.23– 92.6% and 36.13–43.64% at 200, 400 and 800 °C respectively. The loss in CS was linked to loss of hydration water at elevated temper- atures. With respect to the splitting tensile strength (STS), the per- centage STS retained ranges from 87.84–91.85%, 81.94–85.55% and 23.55–43.15% at 200, 400 and 800 °C respectively. Based on ANOVA analysis, the most important experimental parameters for STS and CS of FAC were heating degree and fly ash content and their percentage contribution to CS development were 93:41% and for CS and 89:39% and 4:84%. In order to achieve opti- mum CS and STS, the optimum FA content recommended was 30%. Concrete made with fine waste glass replacing fine recorded the highest CS compared to coarse WGC and combination of fine and coarse WG [245]. Optimum WG content to achieve maximum CS at both ambient and elevated temperature was 10% aggregate replacement for the three combination types. CS of the three con- crete converged close to 700 °C because of its closeness to the melting temperature of waste glass, which is between 700 and 800 °C and the elimination of size effect in the softened state of the glass aggregates. CS obtained for the fine WGC were 40.5, 35, 55, 42, 34.5 and 22 at 20, 60, 150, 300, 500 and 700 °C. Pulverized FAC expressed relative strength improvement at 450 and 650 °C even though durability deteriorated from 250 °C [246]. CS loss was attributed to increased width of ITZ, increased total porosity and coarsening of the hardened cement paste. RHA is more effective than FA in resisting sulphate attack of binary cement mortars. Surprisingly, the RHA mortar experienced strength enhancement of 7% compared to 0% for FA after 90-day immersion in 5% sodium sulphate solution and at 20% cement replacement [247]. However, fly ash experienced higher strength improvement of 8:8% compared to RHA which recorded 24:6% strength reduction both at 40% cement replacement after 90 days. Optimum RHA and FA replacement of cement to ensure CS reten- tion and development is 20% and 40% respectively. Chatveera and Lertwattanaruk [248] recommended 20% RHA replacement of cement durability improvement in concrete and enhancement of resistance to HCl and H2SO4. The resistance to acid attack was observed to be directly proportional to the ðSiO2 þ Al2O3 þ Fe2O3Þ=CaO ratio. The improved resistance of RHA was also corroborated was attributed to the densification of its microstructure, physical and pozzolanic effect as well as presence of Al2O3 [227]. Strength improvement was also recorded at 25% RHA replacement of cement with 0.1 H2SO4 [249]. Chemical resistance of FA and SF to several chemical such as H2SO4, HNO3, acetic acid, H3PO4, Na2SO4, and MgSO4 was investi- gated by [250]. They reported that SF had superior resistance at higher cement replacement from 15%. SF exhibited lower strength loss of 16:6% and 17:8% compared to 23:5% and 38:9% for FA at 15% and 22:5% cement replacements respectively. Chemical resistance of FA is influenced by its fineness. CS increased from 41.5, 53.5, 56, and 61.5 MPa for increasing Blaine fineness of 3000, 3900, 4800 and 9300 cm3 /g [251]. The optimum replacement level to achieve chemical acid resistance varies depends on the type of acid and alkaline solutions involved [252]. It seems the chemical acid resistance of FA was more effec- tive at higher replacements compared to SF. The sulfate resistance was linked to the prevention of ingress of sulfate ions into con- crete, resulting in little formation of gypsum and/or ettringite in concrete [253]. The level of resistance to chemical attack increases with increasing cement content, lowering of w=c ratio and the uti- lization of cement with C3A (tricalcium aluminate) content 7% [254]. Chemical resistance of GGBS depends on high reactivity in the presence of lime, availability of Ca in the pore solution and its dis- tribution in the specimen [255]. GGBS performed better than FA on exposure to leaching and sulphate attack [256]. The authors reported that hydration of C3S and C2S in cements resulted in for- mation of portlandite, which when released, facilitates ingress of sulphate ions and produce expansive products such as gypsum and ettringite. Likewise, GGBS performed better than FA in resist- ing attack from MgSO4 as it recorded the higher CS28 [257]. Up to 50% GGBS can be used in concrete to achieve good sulphate-resisting properties, minimize carbonation as well as thermal cracking [258]. Also, concrete containing up to 70% GGBS showed good resistance to thaumasite form of sulphate attack (TSA) and their resistance was improved with the addition of small amounts of calcium carbonate or calcium sulfate [259,260]. GGBS exhibited stronger resistance to sulphate attack compared to fly ash and the optimum cement replacement for GGBS was 40% [261]. Even though GGBS has good resisting capability, O’Connell et al. [262] pointed out that GGBS should not be utilized in wastewater infrastructures because it cannot withstand the high levels of sulphate and sulphuric acid attack. Waste glass improved durability of WGC by maintaining weight stability during sulphate attack [263]. In addition, field studies cov- ering 6.7 years showed continuous improvement in mechanical performance of slabs and walls made with WGC [264]. Glass fume made from WG particles were observed to exhibit higher resis- tance to sulphate attack [265]. Ganjian and Pouya [266] reported that OPC concrete performed better than SFC when exposed to tidal environment while mixture of SF and GGBS exhibited worse performance. Makhloufi et al. [267] reported that mortar made with quaternary blends including GGBS showed improved sulphate attack resistance than OPC con- crete. Aziz et al. [268] reported that up to 30% GGBS improved the durability of sulphate resisting cement (SRC) and can be used K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1077
- 17. to produce highlydurable concrete. The improvement was attrib- uted to decrease of total pore volume, free lime content, total chlo- ride, total sulphate contents and, subsequently, increase in the resistivity towards sulphate and chloride ions. From the above results, it seems the preferable ranking of the SCMs in terms of resistance to sulphate attack was WG SF GGBS FA RHA. However, confirmatory laboratory and field investigations are suggested to check this ranking. 6. Factors that influence properties of green concrete 6.1. SCM chemical composition Comparison of the chemical composition of the five (5) different SCMs and OPC revealed that, on the average, SF has the highest SiO2 (silica content), followed by RHA. Also, it was observed that fly ash recorded the highest Al2O3 (alumina) content followed by GGBFS. In terms of CaO (calcium oxide) content, OPC recorded the highest value followed by GGBFS as depicted in Fig. 20. 6.2. Water/binder (w/b) ratio Hu et al. [14] observed that higher water/cement ðw=cÞ ratio leads to lower Ca=Si ratio, large pores, higher porosity of the C-S- H gel which causes lower elastic modulus and lower hardness. The authors recommended lower water-cement ratio and incorpo- ration of admixtures to improve mechanical properties of cementi- tious materials. The connection between lower porosity and lower w/b ratio was also corroborated by Gao et al. [269] who also observed that ITZ porosity decreases with increasing curing age, decreasing water ratio and increasing aggregate content. Both Hesami et al. [21] and Lian and Zhuge [270] recommended 0.33 as the optimum w=c ratio for pervious concrete pavement to ensure full hydration and formation of strong cement pastes. 6.3. Curing medium Yazıcı et al. [271] demonstrated that curing condition affects the mechanical performance of reactive powder concrete (RPC). Autoclaved curing gave the highest flexural strengths compared to steam curing and standard curing as shown in Figs. 21 and 22. Bog˘a et al. [213] also reported that increasing the curing periods and applying standard water curing method resulted in significant improvement in the mechanical properties of the concrete. Nath and Sarker [272] reported that even though heat-curing provided early-age strength, it is not replicable at available cast-in situ construction. According to Neupane [65], elevated temperature curing is not cost-effective and practicable. Furthermore, results obtained by Binici et al. [128] and Shafigh et al. [57] depicted in Fig. 23 revealed that water curing obtained the highest CS at 90 days curing age compared to autoclaving curing. Therefore, water curing is recom- mended for curing green concrete to enable full hydration, chemi- cal reaction and bonding of the constituents. 7. Binary, ternary and quarternary SCM mixtures The concept of binary, ternary and quaternary SCM is to obtain blended SCM with properties that are superior than the individual SCM constituents. Utilization of such blended cements overcomes the drawbacks associated with any of the individual constituent and maximizes their individual strengths or advantages. While Rakhimova and Rakhimov [66] recommended a component-wise approach in the development and application of sustainable cement and green concrete, Wang and Chen [273] presented a simplex-centroid design method in determining the proportion of various ternary blend SCM mixtures to achieve target strengths, thereby reducing the need for trial and error mixes. Mohamed [274] recommended ternary mix of cement with 10% FA and 10% SF which obtained highest compressive strength in SCC. Le and Ludwig [32] recommended ternary combination of 20% FA and 20% RHA to produce CS58 of approximately 130 MPa which was recommended for usage in self-compacting high perfor- mance concrete (SCHPC) which increased plastic viscosity and seg- regation resistance but eliminated bleeding. Deb et al. [275] investigated blending of GGBFS with low- calcium Fly ash (Class F) and observed that the shrinkage reduced with the increase in slag content and decrease in sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide (SS=SH) ratio in GPC at room temperature. In order derive the optimum benefits from the use of SCMs, it is expedient that the combination and proportion of selected SCMs for binary, ternary and quarternary SCM mixtures should be prop- erly selected to maximize the synergistic positive effects and min- imize or avoid the synergistic negative impacts. This is achievable to some extent by taking into consideration the elemental compo- sition of each SCM selected for combination, the individual physico-chemical characteristics of each SCM and their effects on concrete/mortar properties from available literatures. 0 20 40 60 80 100 SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO SO3 Na2O K2O P205 TiO2 LOI ComposiƟon(%) Chemical composiƟon FA WG GGBFS RHA SF OPC Fig. 20. Comparison of chemical composition of different SCMs and OPC (Authors). 1078 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 18. 8. Nomenclature andapplications of green concrete utilized in concrete structures Existing literatures on green concrete revealed the existence of different nomenclatures for green concrete depending on the SCM utilized, properties of the green concrete such as compressive strength, performance levels, compactability and density as depicted in Fig. 24. They include HVFAC (high-volume fly ash con- crete), UHPC (ultra-high performance concrete), HPC (high perfor- mance concrete), ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), HSC (high strength concrete), SCC (self-consolidating concrete), LWC (light- weight concrete) and geopolymer concrete (GPC). 8.1. HVFAC (High volume fly ash concrete) High-volume fly ash concrete (HVFAC) are concrete mixtures containing a minimum of 40–50% fly ash by mass of cementitious materials [133,276]. HVFAC with 50% cement replacement with fly ash C was utilized in the construction of Computer Science Build- ing at York University and Lower Notch Dam in Ontario, Canada and Bayview high-rise apartment and was recommended for com- mercial and residential construction applications [61,277]. The strength development of HVFAC depends on fly ash replace- ment levels, water-to-cementitious material ratios and volume of cement paste [278]. While Rashad [279] recommended usage of fly ash as partial or full replacement of natural fine aggregate in HVFAC where fly ash is abundantly available and there is shortage of natural sand as fine aggregate, Li [106] recommended the addi- tion of nano-SiO2 as an accelerating additive to facilitate the poz- zolanic properties of fly ash to improve the early and long-term strength gain. Mehta [280] classified HVFAC into three categories namely low, moderate and high strength HVFAC with minimum CS28 of 20, 30 and 40 and corresponding water-cement ratios of 0.9–1.3, 0.72– 0.83 and 0.5–0.7 respectively. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 20 40 60 Flexuralstrength(Mpa) GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%) Bauxite Steam cured Bauxite Autoclaved cured Granite steam cured Granite Autoclaved cured Fig. 21. Effect of curing condition on Flexural strength and aggregate type [232]. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 20 40 60 Compressivestrength(Mpa) GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%) Bauxite autoclaved cured Bauxite standard cured Fig. 22. Comparison of compressive strength using autoclaved and standard curing media [232]. 0 10 20 30 40 50 Compressivestrengthatdifferentcuring days(Mpa) Different SCMs used in green concrete 90 56 28 Fig. 23. Compressive strength results for different curing methods. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1079
- 19. The benefits ofHVFAC include easier flowability, pumpability and compactability, superior resistance to cracking from thermal shrinkage, autogenous shrinkage and drying shrinkage, cost reduc- tion of construction costs and easy workability, reduction in crack width [133,277,280,281]. In order to improve the implementation of HVFAC in the con- struction industry, the best practice guide developed by Bentz et al. [130] is recommended. Likewise, Shafigh et al. [57] recom- mended the inclusion of oil palm shell as coarse aggregate and limestone powder to reduce cement content by 46–60% and improve CS at early and later ages, Alaka and Oyedele [131] reported that super abundant SP dosage in HVAC helped to obtain relatively lower w/b ratios with good workability. 8.2. UHPC (Ultra high performance concrete) UHPC intends to optimize selected properties of concrete simul- taneously which depends on the usage and exposure conditions of the concrete in real-life applications. Low water content and moderate SP dosage was recommended by Yu et al. [123] in order to facilitate the pozzolanic reaction of the constituent materials. Yu et al. [282] recommended the use of nano-silica and hybrid fibres such as steel and polypropylene for crack reduction and improvement in the flexural strength of UHPC. While Yu et al. [283] reported the need to improve the workability and cost efficiency of UHPC, Ghafari et al. [284] reiterated the need to improve the sustainability of UHPC by reducing the cost through use of lower SP dosage. Kamal et al. [285] recommended the production of UHPC with conventional local materials, while Van Breugel and Van Tuan [286] suggested optimum combination of 10% RHA and 10% SF to reduce autogenous shrinkage and costs of UHPC. Vaitkevicˇius and Šerelis [287] recommended an optimal 15% replacement of quartz powder with SF and addition of PPF to reduce brittle frac- ture failure of UHPC. The authors recorded CS of 124 MPa and 138 MPa without and with heat treatment respectively. According to Tagnit-Hamou et al. [288], UHPC has four classifi- cations as shown in Table 3 and can be used in construction of highly energy efficient, environmentally friendly, affordable and resilient structures with CS ranging from 130-260 MPa, flexural strength 15 MPa, tensile strength 10 MPa and elastic modulus 45 GPa using waste glass (WG). The UHPC was characterized by excellent durability, negligible chloride-ion penetration, low mechanical abrasion, very high resistance to freeze and thaw cycles. Furthermore, Kou and Xing [289] recommended the use of glass powder and fly ash to lower the cost of production of UHPC. CS of 140–150 MPa was achieved under normal curing for 28 days. Gha- fari et al. [290] recommended inclusion of optimal 3% content of nanosilica cement replacement in UHPC to improve early-age strength. The use of short steel fibres at higher fibre dosages was also reported to yield benefits such as higher peak load capacity, enhanced strain hardening, improved post-peak failure response from explosive as well as ductile behavior [291,292]. In order to produce green UHPC with reduced cement content and thereby lower cost, ultrafine by-product materials such as ultrafine palm oil fuel ash (UPOFA-50% cement replacement) has been recommended by Aldahdooh et al. [293] and Aldahdooh et al. [294]. On the other hand, Xiao et al. [295] recommended the use of superfine 40% GGBFS or combination of 10% fly ash and 30% GGBFS cement replacements in UHPC which exhibited ultra-high durability, high strength at low cost. Gesoglu et al. [296] recommended the use of binary and ternary blends cement blends in UHPC to obtain excellent resistance to sul- phate attack, while Ghafari et al. [290] recommended addition of nanosilica to improve early-age strength development of UHPC. In addition, Ghafari et al. [284] advocated for eco-efficient, sustain- able and cheaper UHPC with fly ash, GGBFS and RHA. Güneyisi et al. [297] reported reduced HRWRA dosage, improved workabil- ity, enhanced impermeability and increased CS with combined use of nano silica and treated lightweight aggregates in UHPC. Habel et al. [298] reported that the extremely low permeability of the dense matrix of UHPC facilitates its use as waterproofing layer in bridge decks. This was also corroborated by Habert et al. [299] who advocated for the use of cast-in-place eco-UHPC in bridge rehabilitation because it is fast, efficient, price competitive and its extremely low permeability, high strength and deformabil- ity. Hassan et al. [300] recommended the use of UHPC in slabs because of its high tensile strength and improved ductility in punching shear failure. Kim et al. [301] recommended production of UHPC with CS 120 at low w=b ratio using synergistic industrial slags as cement and fine aggregate replacements in UHPC for enhanced flowability and ecological benefits. Common failure patterns reported in UHPC include shear ten- sion, shear compression, diagonal tension and arch-rib failures [285]. 8.3. UHSC (Ultra high strength concrete) In terms of compressive strength and modulus of elasticity, UHSC performed better compared to NSC and HSC [302] despite concerns of brittleness and fire resistance. Xiong and Liew [302] reported that variation in the CS and MOE of UHSC at elevated tem- perature as shown in Fig. 25 and depends on the quality of the aggregate. Choe et al. [303] recommended the use of blends of polypropylene fibres (PPF) and nylon fibres (NY) prevent spalling in UHPC columns. Shi et al. [304] recommended optimal/synergis- tic combination of 15% SF and 1–20% GGBFS to achieve UHPC with CS of 125 MPa and improved flowability. Wu et al. [305] reported that optimal dosage of 20% SF in UHSC as cement replacement, resulted in reduction of porosity, pore refinement and strength development. The use of nanomaterials such as nano-CaCO3 and nano-SiO2 was encouraged by Wu et al. [306] and Wang et al. [307] because of their contribution to early-age strength, homogeneous and less porous concrete and prevention of agglomeration due to the nucle- ation and filling effects. Also, El Mir et al. [308] recommended opti- mum combination replacement of cement with 8–10% SF and 17– 20% SF to produce UHSC with 100 MPa and CS 120 MPa. Gesoglu et al. [296] demonstrated that steam curing recorded higher CS of 31.2–147.9 MPa compared to CS of 120.8–142.1 MPa achieved Green concrete HSC UHPC UHSC SCC HPC LWC HVFAC Geopolymer concrete Fig. 24. Nomenclatures of green concrete utilized in concrete structures. 1080 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 20. with water-curing byaccelerating the pozzolanic reaction of the SF in the UHPC. Romero et al. [309] reported that the mechanical response of CFST (Concrete-filled steel tubular) slender columns depends on the type of concrete used, the location of the concretes, and the thicknesses of the inner and outer rings. Also, Yao et al. [310] reported that UHSC encased steel beams recorded higher residual shear capacity, better post-cracking stiffness and better shear duc- tility than pre-stressed UHSC beams. Multi-curing was advocated by Yazıcı [311] to achieve UHSC. UHSC with CS 120 MPa was achieved with 8-h high-pressure steam curing (autoclaving). Allena and Newtson [312] advocated production of UHPC using local materials such as SF and steel fibres and achieved CS28 and flexural strengths of 165.6 MPa and 18.3 MPa and 161.9 MPa and 10.93 MPa with and without fibres respectively at 0.25 w=c and 0.20 water/cementitious ratios. In addition, the seven-day CS ðCS7Þ range of the UHSC ranged between 89.86 and 146.06 MPa. 8.4. LWC (Lightweight concrete) Libre et al. [313] advocated the use of LWC incorporating steel fibres in high rise, earthquake-resistant buildings because of bene- fits such as reduced density, enhanced compressive and flexural ductility as well as energy absorption capacity. This was also corroborated by Choi et al. [314] who reported improvement in flexural strength and toughness. Bui et al. [315] reported that high-performance lightweight concrete (HPLWC) with CS of 49–57 MPa can be produced using 60% FA + 40% cement and 30% FA + 40% cement + 30% RHA. According to Sivakumar and Gomathi [316], the lightweight aggregates (LWA) utilized in LWC could be from industrial by- products such as fly ash, bottom ash, SF, GGBFS, RH, slag, palm oil shell and clay and yields benefits such as reduction of construc- tion costs, ease of handling and construction of large precast units. Yazdani and Goucher [317] recommended the use of multiple wrapping using carbon FRP lightweight composites to strengthen and upgrade existing bridges. They also suggested the use of SCM and strong quality control measures to overcome the drawbacks of lower MOE, higher creep and shrinkage of LWC, porosity and bleeding and failure modes such as cracking, delamination and rupture common in LWAC. Kayali et al. [318] recommended the use of sintered FA along- side polypropylene fibres or steel fibres to improve workability, cohesiveness and compactability of LWC. Hwang et al. [319] rec- ommended the use of sintered manufactured LWA produced at 1100 °C for the production of self-compacting LWC with CS28 range of 25–55 MPa and unit weight of 1878–2057 kg=m3 . The self- compacting LWC exhibited excellent flowability without bleeding or segregation. On the other hand, Oyejobi et al. [320] recom- mended 20% cement replacement with RHA for the production of cheap and durable LWC. RHA and waste glass was recommended by Torkaman et al. [321] and Yu et al. [322] for the production of concrete blocks and ultra-LWC which contributes to economic design of buildings and environmental sustainability. Ling and Teo [323] recom- mended optimum 10% RHA cement replacement in the manufac- turing of load-bearing bricks which recorded highest CS of 17:51 N=mm2 . LWC had superior characteristics such as thermal insulation, fire/high temperature resistance, sound insulation, durability, reduction of risk of earthquake damage and reduction of dead load [324]. Self-compacting lightweight concrete offers benefit such as lower susceptibility to corrosion in early age than normal SCC [325]. Ünal et al. [326] reiterated that more opportunities exist for LWA in concrete since aggregate constitute 70–80% by volume of Portland cement concrete. Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [327] advocated for rigorous mix proportioning to avoid conflicting Table 3 Classification of UHPC [288]. Parameters Class A Class B Class C Class D (architecture) Flowability Semi-flowable Flowable Highly flowable Highly flowable Minimum slump (mm) 200 230 260 260 w/b ratio 0.15–0.19 0.19–0.225 0.225–0.25 0.225–0.25 Solids in SP/cement (wt%) 1–3 1–3 1–3 0.225–0.25 Steel fibre (%) 2 2 2 – PVA fibre (%) – – – 2.5 2-day UHPGC CS (MPa) 200 175–200 160–175 – 28 day Normal concrete CS (MPa) 160 140 130 100 91-day Normal concrete CS (MPa) 180 150 140 120 Flexural Strength (MPa) 25 20 15 10 Modulus of Elasticity (GPa) 50 45 40 40 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 30 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Compressivestrength(MPa) ModulusofElasƟcity(GPa) Temperature (OC) CS MOE Fig. 25. Compressive strength and Modulus of Elasticity of UHSC at elevated temperatures [263]. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1081
- 21. properties. Previous studiesreported that addition of nano-silica, SF and coal-bottom ash in LWC for improved durability [328–330]. Kucharczyková et al. [331] advocated oven-dried aggregate to improve the strength and durability of LWAC. Shannag [332] recommended cement replacement of 5–15% SF which produced LWC with CS range of 22.5–43 MPa and air dry- density of 1935–1995 kg/m3 with benefits such as larger strain capacity at failure and high degree of workability. Arisoy and Wu [333] stated that the controlling parameters for production of high-performance-LWC are water absorption rate, density and microstructure. According to Thomas and Bremner [334], LWAC produced using LWA exhibit improved properties because of inter- nal curing provided by LWA. Other LWA commonly used are clay aggregates, waste glass and metakaolin, fly ash and GGBFS and polymer pellets with benefits such as thermal insulation, improved MOE, reduced density, reduc- tion of cement consumption, stoppage of bleeding and segregation as a result of decrease in water absorption, good corrosion resis- tance, reduction in sintering temperature, reduction of ASR and increase in failure point loading [335–339]. 8.5. HSC (High strength concrete) Demirbog˘a and Gül [340] recommended the use of silica fume alongside other SCMs to make HSC. Haque and Kayali [341] achieved optimum CS of 94–111 MPa with 10% optimum cement replacement with Class F fine fly ash (FFA). Poon et al. [342] demonstrated that HSC with CS28 of 80 MPa can be achieved with w/b of 0.24 and FA content of 45%. Kumar and Ramana [343] recommended optimum combination of 18% fly ash and 50%. copper slag to achieve HSC with CS of 60– 70 MPa and 80–90 MPa for 7 and 28 curing days respectively. Zeyad et al. [344] advocated proper curing which improved strength and durability of high-strength concrete and the use of treated and ultrafine POFA to achieve HSC with CS180 100 MPa at 20, 40 and 60% UPOFA cement replacements. Ungound UPOFA- HSC was noted to outperform ground-UPOFA HSC. Sharmila and Dhinakaran [345] recommended optimum 10% ultrafine slag to increase strength and durability characteristics of HSC and also observed that ground ultra-fine slag performed better than ultra- fine slag. Elchalakani et al. [346] produced HSC with 60% GGBFS and 20% OPC with low carbon footprint, which gave CS7 and CS28 of 61.8 and 78.5 at 0.38 w=c ratio and 60% GGBFS while Kırca et al. [347] pro- duced HSC with CS 75 MPa with 40% cement replacement levels using CAC/GGBFS. Arivalagan [139] observed that strength devel- opment of GGBS is slow and started at 28 days curing for 20% cement replacement. Zhu et al. [348] suggested adequate mixing time to avert internal defects caused by fibers. Bagheri et al. [349] produced HSC CS 80 MPa using ternary mixes containing 15% slag and 5% SF as well as 15% slag and 7:5% SF. foundry slags Also, Sharma et al. [350] state that HSC can be produced with 10–45% foundry slags as partial replacement for fine aggregate and 15% alccofine as cement replacement while Amnadnua et al. [351] produced HSC of CS as high as 67 MPa at 28 days with 20% PC GFA with ground fly ash with ground carbide residue), a by- product of acetylene gas production. HSC can also be produced using local materials such as RHA. Ismail and Waliuddin [163] mentioned that HSC can be produced using locally available materials such as RHA. The optimum RHA content as cement replacement ranged between 10 and 30% [30,163,352] which produced HSC with minimum CS of 40– 50 MPa. Also, the optimum grinding condition was 650 °C [30]. Though grinding improved the pozzolanicity of RHA due to its high specific surface area [142,353], the results obtained by Venkata- narayanan and Rangaraju [142] showed the lack of the need for grinding. Since workability is very important in the production of HSC, Erdog˘du et al. [354] emphasized good workmanship as well as inclusion of 10% SF and SP to prevent slump loss while Chandra and Hardjito [355] suggested increase of FA up to 30% and addition of calcium carbonate up to 15% to improve workability and achieved early-age strength development. Amin and Abu el-Hassan [356] stated that NS improves mechanical properties of HSC. Khan and Abbass [357] canvassed for the use of steel fibres and PVA fibres to improve load-bearing capacity and ductility of HSC beam. Pelisser et al. [358] stated that recycled tyre rubberized concrete can be utilized to produce HSC with CS28 50 MPa but requires combinations of chemical treat- ment with NaOH and addition of 15% SF. Sarıdemir [359] produced HSC with CS 80 MPa using 15% SF and combination of 15% SF and 5% ground pumice. In another research, Amarkhail [137] recommended optimum SF contents of 10 and 15% which achieved highest CS of 70.8 MPa and FS of 69.5 MPa respectively. 8.6. HPC (High performance concrete) HPC is a special concrete that meet specific performance or combination of requirements which could be any of the following: high early-age strength, long-term mechanical properties, enhanced resistance to chemical attack or enhanced flowability and low shrinkage. In order to reduce cost-prohibitive trial batches and optimize the constituent properties, Islam et al. [360] devel- oped statistical regression model which can be used to predict CS28 and slump for RHA-incorporated HPC. Arunachalam and Gopalakrishnan [361] produced HPC which performed well in both normal and aggressive environments using 25% and 50% Class C fly ash cement replacement in concrete. Also, Safiuddin et al. [362] manufactured SCHPC (self-compacting high- performance concrete) with optimum 15% RHA cement replace- ment and reported that optimum RHA depends on the production process. Ponikiewski and Gołaszewski [363] observed that grinding of fly ash has more effect on CS than flexural strength and also pro- duced HPSCC (high-performance self-compacting concrete) of CS 80 MPa using high-calcium fly ash. Sabet et al. [364] noted that self-consolidating high perfor- mance concrete (SCHPC), a hybrid of SCC and HPC, benefits from and exhibits properties of the two concretes which includes great flowability and stability, high strength and excellent durability. With 10 and 20% SF as well as 10 and 20% FA cement replace- ments, SCHPC with CS28 of 75.5 and 79.5 MPa and 67 and 81 MPa were produced. Le and Ludwig [32] reported that SP dosage above SP saturation dosage induced bleeding and produced HPC with CS56 of approxi- mately 130 MPa with 20 wt% FA and 20 wt% RHA separately and recommended that RHA can be utilized as a viscosity modifying admixture because of its macro-mesoporous nature. Le et al. [140] reported that RHA should be ground to very fine particle sizes P 5.7 mm to mitigate ASR. Gonzalez-Corominas et al. [365] also produced HPC with 30% fly ash and 70% Portland cement using recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) and recommended steam curing to reduce the porosity and STS (splitting tensile strength). Borosnyói [366] recommended 5% cement substitution with SF in concrete to improve the CS, durability and resistance to acid of HPC. Büyüköztürk and Lau [367] reported that the key features of HPC are strength (50 MPa), ductility and durability and recom- mended the use of short fibres to achieve improved ductility, higher flexural strength, tensile strength and higher toughness of HPC. Camões et al. [368] demonstrated that HPC of CS up to 60 MPa can be produced with up to 40% fly ash cement replace- 1082 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 22. ment, by eliminatingcoarse particles with 75 lm sieve while Chang [369] reported that combination of fly ash and slag can be utilized to produced HPC with CS 56 MPa with finer pores and denser microstructure. Chen et al. [370] reported that the main properties of HPGC (high performance glass concrete) were determined by aggregate replacement and w=b ratios. Ling et al. [371] suggested elevated heat curing for GGBFS and the use of low w=b ratio of 0.35 to achieve CS7 45 N=mm2 . HPC has been extensively applied in large infrastructural projects such as bridges, tunnels in Denmark [372]. For Faro Bridge, 40 kg=m3 fly ash was used in the pylons and underwater concrete, 50 kg=m3 of fly ash was utilized in some of the founda- tions of Alssund Bridge while a combination of cement, fly ash and microsilica were used in Guldborgsunnd tunnel with a service life of 100 years. 8.7. GPC (Geopolymer concrete) Previous studies have investigated the use of geopolymers and geopolymer concrete in the production of eco-sustainable concrete blocks, alternative and novel binders for concrete production, ultra-lightweight concrete and GFRP composites [373–376]. He et al. [377] reported that the mechanical properties of GP compos- ites depend on alkalinity, raw material mix ratio, curing duration, RHA particle size and geopolymerization reactions. The eco-sustainable block offered advantages such as lower cost, less energy consumption and less CO2 emission but the CO2 footprint is dependent on the type, concentration and dosage of the alkali activators utilized [376]. Huiskes et al. [374] reported that ultra-lightweight GPC has potential applications in load- bearing concrete and thermal insulating binding material and requires pre-soaking the LWAs and optimized packing of the GPC mixture to achieve better stability, compaction and porosity. Assi et al. [378] recommended addition of 10% Portland cement to replace fly ash, 60–100% NaOH to binder ratio, heat curing and w/b ratio of 0.28 to obtain GPC with CS28 of 64.3 MPa. Xie and Kay- ali [379] recommended polycarboxylate-based SP for Class C fly ash and naphthalene-based SP for Class F fly ash, even though they were less effective compared to OPC. Zhang et al. [380] proposed the utilization of a comprehensive index to evaluate suitability of fly ashes for generation of high-strength geopolymers. The index is a function of specific surface area, interparticle volume and glass chemistry of the fly ash. The optimal conditions recommended for development of novel binders made with waste glass and limestone as follows: Ca=SiO2 ratio of 0.5, 40 °C curing temperature, and 9% Na2O [373]. Torres-Carrasco and Puertas [381] demonstrated that waste glass is an effective alkaline activator in GP Al2O3 preparation as an alter- native to sodium silicates. Martinez-Lopez and Escalante-Garcia [382] reported that the factors which influence properties of com- posite binder comprising waste glass and GGBFS in descending order were waste glass (%), curing temperature, % Na2O, and alkali activator ratio. The recommended optimal level of 100% glass, 60 °C and 10% Na2O using Na2CO3 to produce GP with CS28 range of 69–74 MPa. Maranan et al. [375] recommended the use of GPC-reinforced with GFRP bars as well as sand coating which yielded bending moment capacities 1.2–1.5 times greater than steel-reinforced GPC and provide mechanical interlock and friction forces adequate to secure effective bond between GFRP bars and GPC. Kourti et al. [383] suggested the potential application of geopolymer-glass composites in pre-cast paving blocks and tiles because of the high strength and density, low porosity, low water absorption, low leaching and high acid resistance they exhibit. The choice of source materials for GP depends on factors such as availability, cost, type of application and specific demand of end users while the CS of GP depends on curing time and curing tem- perature [384]. The authors recommended curing temperature range of 60–90 and curing time of 24–72 h for strength increase and optimum molarity of 16 M for NaOH solution and 0.4 fly ash ratio. Zhou et al. [385] preferred the use of high-Al2O3 fly ash to low-Al2O3 fly ash in production of geopolymers because of their superior performance in terms of CS and microstructure. Geopoly- mers produced with high-Al2O3 fly ash exhibited less mass loss and higher strength after elevated-temperature curing compared to the geopolymers produced using low- fly ash. The different content of Al2O3 results in different reactivity of the raw materials and is responsible for the differences in morphology and extent of com- pactness of geopolymer formed [385]. High Al2O3 leads to higher reactivity, formation of more homogeneous, denser and more com- pact microstructure, and consequently higher compressive strength and stability. However, low-Al2O3fly ash can be still be utilized but requires additional alumino-silicate source which can be provided by combination of NaOH and Sodium silicate. The optimal synthesis conditions they recommended for low-Al2O3 fly ash were curing temperature of 80 °C, Si=Al ratio of 2:1, modulus ratio of 1, additional water/solid ratio of 0.1. Apart from Al2O3 content, fly ash has been classified into two types, namely Class F and Class C based on their source, composi- tion and strength development [386] as shown in Table 4. This classification should guide proper selection of fly ash for various targeted applications. 9. Analytical and numerical modelling of green concrete Proper experimental investigation is essential for reliable and accurate analytical and numerical modelling of green concrete and its properties. The three methods, experimental, analytical and numerical, should be viewed as complementary means to comprehensively understand, analyze and predict the behavior/ response of both green concrete and ordinary concrete within the confines of available limited literatures. It must be borne in mind that each of the three methods presents peculiar advantages as well as drawbacks and when in combination overcomes some of the inherent limitations of individual methods. Extensive experi- mental investigation is expensive, time-consuming and energy intensive and requires proper planning to achieve best results. In order to save time and costs, experiments should be combined with any other available approaches to optimize experimental results. Šejnoha et al. [387] combined experimental program with ANN and ATENA finite element for analyzing MOE, fracture energy and tensile strength of fly-ash based concrete. Nie et al. [388] simulated the pozzolanic and hydration reaction of fly ash concrete and their decomposition under sulphate attack using Crack-Nicholson equa- tion. Nguyen et al. [389] implemented the 3D finite element model of GPC in ABAQUS. Gao et al. [269] made us of backscattered electron image anal- ysis and HYMOSTRUC model to investigate the ITZ microstructure of ternary blended cement comprising OPC, blast furnace slag and filler. Nanoindentation technique, based on grid indentation methodology, in conjunction with deconvolution analysis, was uti- lized by Zadeh and Bobko [390] for predicting response of individ- ual phase of LWAC (lightweight aggregate concrete) containing fly ash and GGBFS). Utilized the chemical-hydration analytical model for evaluating the CS, Ca(OH)2 contents, chemically bound water and porosity properties of high-calcium fly ash concrete at different composi- tion and ages. A similar approach was also used by Wang and Park K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1083
- 23. [391] for analyzingCS development of fly ash concrete. Compres- sive stress-strain model was utilized by [56] for predicting strain and CS of heat-cured low-calcium GPC. Golewski et al. [392] for- mulated and implemented 3D CSS (compact shear specimen) numerical model in ABAQUS to study the fracture propagation in concrete composite using XFEM. Analytical methods require some essential information before it can be used and accurate knowledge of the properties of the con- stituent and green concrete [304]. Numerical methods are compu- tationally intensive and use of appropriate law that governs the properties of the constituent of green concrete and the applied loading conditions. In addition, successful applications of numeri- cal methods to evaluate green concrete properties are scarce in literature. 10. Potential benefits of green concrete in early project completion and cost savings According to Hong Kong Design Code, the lowest grade of con- crete for use in reinforced concrete is C20 (20 MPa). For construc- tion of multi-storey, minimum concrete grade of 25 MPa is often required and utilized [393]. For high-rise buildings, HSC are often utilized with concrete strength ranging from 55.1 to 131 MPa [393,394]. During concrete construction projects, allowance of 28 curing days is given for concrete works including columns, slabs and beams to develop sufficient strength in compliance with the concrete/project design requirements. For high-rise buildings, sometimes, up to a year or more is spent before the lower floors are loaded which delays project completion [395]. This construc- tion delay was also highlighted by Johari et al. [396] who reported delay in full loading of many construction works after several months of casting. With early compressive strength development of green con- crete which range from 30.58-122 MPa and 29.7–162 MPa for 3 and 7 days of curing as displayed in Table 5, the curing waiting time is significantly reduced. The pozzolanic properties of the SCM in the green concrete promote early strength development which has the potential to facilitate early project completion. Com- pared to traditional project construction, the project completion time can be reduced by at least 50% with the use of green concrete of high early strength such as UHPC, HSC and advanced construc- tion technology via construction automation. Automation of green concrete construction, as a result of improved workability and flowability, leads to improvement in labour productivity, safer- working environment and improved quality of construction. Sav- ings in construction time and labour cost was reported by [397] through the utilization of green SCC (self-consolidation concrete) with 50% fly ash replacement of cement. Likewise, the improved pumpability of green concrete has the potential to reduce labour requirements for construction. This find- ing was corroborated by [395] who reported significant reduction in labour requirements and material cost. Cost savings of $3, 824, 007 was also reported by Ahmad and Shah [398] with the use of HSC of 84 MPa compared to conventional concrete of 28 MPa. In addition, the excellent workability of green concrete helps to over- come the difficulties often encountered in conventional concrete during construction of heavily reinforced structures [399]. Utiliza- tion of green concrete in precast concrete elements has the poten- tial to also improve manpower savings [400] and likewise time savings through the use of fast-curing methods such as steam hot curing and autoclaving, which achieve HSC within two curing days [401,402]. As a result of reduced manpower during concrete construction, green concrete can be combined with lean construc- tion methods to deliver projects on-time and to-budget. Integra- tion of lean construction with sustainable construction was also supported by [403]. Retardation experienced in green concrete reported by several authors [61,404,405] was as a result of inadequate water which leads to self-dessication, improper mix proportioning and impro- per mixing of green concrete mixtures, poor SCM particle prepara- tion and improper curing methods. All these shortcomings are linked to inadequate understanding of the roles of SCMs, SCM type and content, chemical admixtures and influence of curing temper- ature. These shortcomings are overcomed as we learn from past experiments through data mining and assimilation. The retarda- tion effects of GGBS and FA, which is marked by moderate stimu- lation of hydration in GGBS and weak hydration in FA at early ages, were attributed to the physico-chemical effects of FA [404]. On the other hand, the retardation effects were attributed to the nature and condition of the surfaces of the FA [406] while Thomas [61] attributed it to the low calcium content of FA. Thomas [61] also mentioned that concrete setting and invariably concrete strength development are affected by composition and quantity of SCM, type and amount of cement, w/cm ratio (water- cementitious materials ratio), type and amount of chemical admix- tures and concrete temperature. Furthermore, retardation effects were also reported by some authors in concrete and mortars incorporating RHA [23,102]. The retardation effects and strength development observed at 3 and 7 days was found to correlate linearly with the total heat released expressed as volume of available water and limited by calcium hydroxide (CH) availability [23]. On the other hand, the coarse nat- ure of the untreated RHA was found to affect the strength develop- ment of mortar [407]. However, [27] reported that RHA is a promising SCM which retains its reactivity potential and resilience despite the effects of calcinations temperature, grinding, chemical pre-treatment and manufacturing process variability. For WG, retardation is caused by smooth surface of WG parti- cles which cause weak interface with the glass mortar system [408], lower rate of hydration, higher effective water-cement ratio and neglible water absorption [409], coarse grain size [410] and incomplete adhesion between WG and cement paste as well as excessive cement replacement [47,411]. In order to avoid the retardation effects in WGC, finer WG par- ticle sizes 38 lm was recommended by Shao et al. [412], particle sizes 0.3 mm was recommended by Shayan and Xu [413] while Table 4 Differences between Class F and Class C fly ashes [62]. Class F fly ash Class C fly ash Source Anthracite and bituminous coal Lignite and sub- bituminous coal Composition Aluminium silicate glass crystalline quartz, hematite magnetite and mullite Calcium-alumino- silicate glass, hematite magnetite and mullite Pozzolanicity Less pozzolanic properties Has higher pozzolanicity Cementing agent requirement Needs cementing agents such as lime or alkali Does not need activation Lime content (%) 20% lime (Cao) 20% Early-age strength Early-age properties slightly lower Greater early-age strength Heat of hydration Produces less heat of hydration Produces more heat of hydration Use in concrete Used for high-volume fly ash concrete Used for low-volume fly ash concrete Applications Structural concrete, high- performance concrete and concrete exposed to sulphate environments Residential constructions and prohibited for high sulphate environments 1084 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 24. Table 5 Compressive strengthof different types of green concrete and the effects of the SCM utilized. Author(s) W/SCM W/C CS (MPa) Type of concrete Remarks 3 7 14 28 Zhang et al. [435] 0.30 0.33 77.9 94.1 RHAC Reduction in porosity width of interfacial transition zone (ITZ) Chao-Lung et al. [436] 0.35 0.44 38 47 52 60 RHAC (20% RHA) Addition of ground RHA improved concrete impermeability and strength efficiency of cement Ismail and Waliuddin [163] 0.32 0.4 0 46.7 56 70.2 RHAC (20% RHA) Slump (45 mm). High strength concrete was obtained using locally available RHA. For successful application of RHAC, workability needs to be different from the control Mahmud et al. [437] 0.36 0.40 45.1 52.9 66.7 RHAC (20%RHA) Strength improvement, reduction of drying shrinkage and durability improvement were observed de Sensale [438] 0.32 44.3 54.8 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (48 mm). RHA exhibited filler and pozzolanic functions. Residual RHA gave higher early age strength while controlled incinerated achieved better late-age strength Cordeiro et al. [439] 0.35 0.44 53– 54 70 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (20 mm). Reduced chloride-ion penetrability. Grinding time should be limited to 120 mins for better pozzolanic properties Ganesan et al. [30] 0.53 29.7 39.3 42.5 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (48 mm). Improved compressive strength, increased water absorption, reduction of chloride-ion diffusion and permeability and sorptivity Yu et al. [440] 0.20 44 65 HVFAC Slump was180-200 mm. Suitable for general construction. 60% reduction in embodied concrete energy, 70% reduction in CO2 emission 15% reduction in material cost Radlinski and Olek [441] 32 42 54 FAC (20% FA + 5% SF) Ternary blended cement concrete. Synergistic effects noted from 7 days. Lower SG of FA SF promoted low w/b. Qiang et al. [442] 0.35 0.41 46 60 78 FA HSC Improved flowability, late-age strength decreased autogenous shrinkage reduction of chloride-ion permeability Qiang et al. [442] 0.25 0.29 68 86 101 FA HSC Improved early-age CS at low w/b ratio. Alaka and Oyedele [131] 0.28 0.56 24.7 37.8 HVFAC (50% FA + 4% SP) SP promoted lower-binder ratios with good workability. Not suitable for concrete requiring abrasion resistanceAlaka and Oyedele [131] 0.31 0.62 21.6 32.6 HVFAC (50% FA + 4% SP) Shaikh and Supit [443] 0.4 0.67 14 17 27 FAC (32% FA + 8%UFFA) Reduction of rebar corrosion Shen et al. [444] 0.32 0.46 30.58 43.07 52.7 62.6 GGBS + FA High strength concrete at early age Mehta et al. [445] 64.4 Fly-ash based GPC High early-age strength development Zhang et al. [47] 0.24 0.33 68 92 121 SFC (10%) Ternary blended cement concrete. Improved interface bond between cement paste and aggregate. Proper mixing is required to prevent SF agglomeration Zhang et al. [47] 0.30 0.33 58 75 103 SFC (10%SF) Ternary blended cement concrete. Increased w/b ratio reduced the CS Youm et al. [330] 0.28 0.30 60 68 74.2 SFC (7%SF) Normal-weight aggregate concrete (NWAC). Increased CS was noted Youm et al. [330] 0.26 0.28 62 64 72.3 SFC (7%SF) Lightweight agg. Concrete. Internal curing effects reduced LWAC chloride- ion permeability. Type of aggregate and chemical composition of cement paste influence durability Radlinski and Olek [441] 39 50 58 SFC (SF only) Binary cement concrete. CS lower compared to ternary cement concrete Thang et al. [446] 0.16 92 132 158 UHPC (SF 10%+ GGBS 20%) High early-age strength development cured at room temp Thang et al. [446] 0.16 122 150 164 UHPC (SF 10%+ GGBS20 %) Improved high early-age strength development Yazıcı et al. [271] 0.21 162 177 Reactive powder concrete (SF GGBS) Met the requirements to be used as UHPC. Reduction of corrosion risk and risk of thermal cracking Yazıcı et al. [271] 0.21 204–243 Reactive powder concrete (SF GGBS-Autoclaved and steam- cured for 2 days) Autoclave curing and steam curing reduced unreacted SCM which improved compressive strength. High temperature favours strength development of GGBFS Dehghan et al. [447] 0.43 0.45 34 38 WGC (Recycled GFRP) Recycled GFRP did not cause ASR. Exhibited pozzolanic behaviour Gesoglu et al. [448] 0.20 128 154 UHPC (Micro-glass + micro steel fibre) Improvement in fracture energy, modulus of elasticity and ductility Harbec et al. [265] 0.35 54.5 59.8 HPC (10% Glass fibre replacement of cement) Produced comparable strength to SF. Glass fibre fume (GF) reduced ASR expansion and ITZ. Exhibited pozzolanic properties and is a good replacement for SF Kushartomo et al. [449] 0.14 0.2 136 RPC (Glass powder-20%) Similar to SF in terms of performance after steam curing for 10–12 h at 95 °C and 14 days curing age. It is a good replacement for quartz powder and silica fume (continued on next page) K.M.Liewetal./ConstructionandBuildingMaterials156(2017)1063–10951085
- 25. 600 lm particlewas advocated by Lee et al. [414]. Also, valoriza- tion of WG into fine particles was suggested by Omran and Tagnit- Hamou [415] to avoid retardation effects of WG in concrete. In terms of economic benefits, GPC was reported to be 25% cheaper compared to Portland cement concrete [416]. Also, esti- mated cement cost savings of 31:5% and overall construction cost savings of 14:2% was obtained when 25% RHA was used to replace cement [249]. 11. Future trends in production and application of green concrete Green concrete can be used in blocks, floor screeding underlays and façade panels [417]. Green concrete is foreseen to be applied more in pre-fabricated construction technology because it is more environmentally friendly than traditional cast-in-situ concrete technology [418]. GGBFS-based green concrete is used in mass concreting to limit and control temperature rise because of its lower heat generation compared to OPC [419]. UHSC is currently limited to offshore and marine structures, industrial floors, pavements and barriers and future applications are foreseen in infrastructure projects requiring slender structural members such as skyscrapers. Another future trend is the utilization of Green UHSC and Green UHPC in CFST composite columns in high-rise buildings and other struc- tures with heavy axial loadings. Green concrete is also foreseen to be utilized in commercial production of precast concrete panels, terrazzo tiles, concrete masonry blocks and paving stones [420]. Green UHSC is also appli- cable in prestressed and precast concrete members for industrial and nuclear storage facilities and in combination with steel fibres can be used to eliminate passive reinforcements [292]. Another trend now is to simplify the production (curing) pro- cesses of UHPC at a reduced cost by replacement of the costly com- ponents such as cement, steel fibres and silica powder [421]. UHPFRC made with silica sand (500 lm maximum size), GGBFS and steel fibres (3% and 13 mm length) can also be used to strengthen existing RC beams [422]. LWC is increasingly utilized in residential and office buildings to achieve reduced load, improved heat and sound adsorption in par- titions and wall [423]. LWC reinforced with polymer fibres can be utilized in sidewalk concrete slabs, in bridge elements such as decks, girders, piers, parking garages as well as offshore platforms, thermal and acoustic insulating lightweight screeds above struc- tural floors [317,424,425]. LWAC is also used in high-rise buildings, long span bridges, buildings with poor foundation construction and floating and off- shore structures as well as external and internal walls, panels, roof- ing decks and floors [322,326]. Optimized lightweight UHPC-HSS can also be utilized in deck panels of movable bridge [426]. Yun-Ming et al. [427] reported the use of clay-based GP in form of geopolymer binders and pyraments in precast and prestressed concrete, building thermal insulation, foundry, production of high quality ceramic tiles and bricks, aircraft composites and cabin inte- riors and lightweight concrete. Geopolymers can also be used in the solidification and immobi- lization of heavy metal wastes [428]. Maranan et al. [429] reported that GFRP-RGC system can be used in compression members where corrosion resistance, material greenness, durability, electro- magnetic transparency and sustainability are required. MK-based GP direct coating of reinforcements in aggressive marine environ- ments was recommended because it exhibited low permeability, excellent adhesion and anticorrosive properties [430]. In summary, the future trends in applications of green concrete is diverse and more researches are required to encourage its usage. Table5(continued) Author(s)W/SCMW/CCS(MPa)TypeofconcreteRemarks 371428 Harbietal.[450]3444WGmortar(5%GP+25%MK)Promotedshrinkagereduction SolimanandTagnit-Hamou [401] 0.190.24125175UHPC(70%SF+30%WG:Normal curing) Improveddispersionbysuperplasticizer,enhancedparticleinterlockingand compressivestrength SolimanandTagnit-Hamou [401] 0.190.24234(2days)UHPC(70%SF+30%WG:steamhot curing) Steamhotcuringat90°Cfor48hat100%RHacceleratedthepozzolanic reactionsandfacilitatedearly-strengthdevelopment SolimanandTagnit-Hamou [402] 171(Normalcuring- 91days);196(Steam curing-2days) UHPC(50%Glasssand+(50% Quartzsand) DidnotexhibitASRbecauseofloww/bratio.Improvedhighstrengthafter normalandsteamcuringfor2days 1086 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 26. 12. Current challengesand obstacles Some obstacles faced in green concrete applications in the con- struction include difficulties in compliance with regulatory stan- dards such as minimum clinker concrete levels and chemical composition of cements, lack of or insufficient durability data of spanning up to 20 years or more, differentiation of green concrete for different applications, more research development to pro- mote better understanding of the chemistry of green concrete [386]. This necessitates the revision of various construction regula- tory codes to make them more environmentally friendly and encourage adoption of green concrete. Guidelines and affordable technologies for efficient processing and production of green concrete are required alongside perfor- mance data to justify and inform changes in construction codes and standards [431]. Field data on green concrete applications are limited. Field applications of green concrete in various struc- tural forms are required alongside standardization to encourage to generate long-term data and guide their applications [432]. Also, more durability data on shrinkage, creep, abrasion and ASR are needed [433]. Roy [434] pointed out the following challenges such as develop- ment of standards to gain widespread acceptance and deployment, development of database which can guide their manufacturing and field deployment. Others mentioned include improved under- standing of the reaction mechanism of green concrete, improved characterization of different complex green concrete combinations in liquid and solid phases, and effects of different beneficiation parameters of the raw materials on green concrete performance. Appropriate hands-on training and re-training should be given to built-environment professionals to create more awareness about the benefits of green concrete. This will encourage the diffu- sion of green concrete practices in the construction industries. Likewise, challenges faced in its adoption by the construction and consulting companies should be addressed. In addition, new and affordable activators are required to encourage sustainable development and deployment of green con- crete in field applications. Cheap and affordable characterization techniques are also required especially for developing countries where cost of research and development is not affordable. Incen- tives should also be given to construction companies, Universities and research institutes to pioneer development and application of green concrete in their infrastructural projects. Furthermore, research clusters for green concrete should be cre- ated to encourage continuous innovation of green concrete prod- ucts and construction practices. Indigenous manufacturing methods should be encouraged to produce cheap green concrete products and reduce over-dependence on expensive imported technologies. Furthermore, efforts to encourage green concrete in construc- tion should be co-ordinated to avoid duplication of research, fast- track green concrete applications and development of best prac- tices to entrench it in the construction industry on a sustainable basis. 13. Conclusion Green concrete comes in various forms such as high-strength concrete, ultra-high performance concrete, ultra-high strength concrete, self-consolidated concrete, high-performance concrete, lightweight concrete, high-volume fly ash concrete and geopoly- mer concrete. The approaches that would be adopted to encourage green concrete in construction would be different in each country because of differences in development priorities, capacity and skill level of local construction industry. Utilization of waste materials and unconventional, alternative materials as SCM and aggregates in green concrete is one of the most effective, economic, innovative and sustainable methods to improve the performance of concrete structures. Utilization of green concrete in large-scale infrastructure projects globally should be promoted. In order to encourage adoption of green concrete in construc- tion, appropriate standards are urgently required as well as cross-disciplinary collaborations among construction stakeholders. In addition, more demonstration projects and further research and developments for the development of alternative binders from green materials to reduce the need for OPC are required. Green concrete is highly recommended for construction industry owing to its environmental, technical and economic benefits. From our literature review, the following orders of ranking are hereby proposed to guide selection of SCM materials for target green concrete applications: i. Resistance to chloride penetration: GGBS RHA SF FA WG ii. ASR mitigation: SF FA CRHA GGBS WG RRHA iii. CS performance at elevated temperature: FA GGBS SF iv. Resistance to sulphate attack: WG SF GGBS FA RHA. Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge UGC-Postgraduate Stu- dentship Hong Kong Government Award/funding given to Sojobi A.O. towards his PhD programme in the Department of Architec- ture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. Sojobi A.O. appreciates the guidance and support of colleagues towards the writing of this manuscript. The authors appreciate the constructive feedback from the reviewers which led to significant improvement of this manuscript. References [1] S. Kabir, A. Al-Shayeb, I.M. Khan, Recycled construction debris as concrete aggregate for sustainable construction materials, Procedia Eng. 145 (2016) 1518–1525. [2] A. Mehta, R. Siddique, An overview of geopolymers derived from industrial by-products, Constr. Build. Mater. 127 (2016) 183–198. [3] J.K. Prusty, S.K. Patro, S. Basarkar, Concrete using agro-waste as fine aggregate for sustainable built environment–A review, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 5 (2) (2016) 312–333. [4] A.M. Rashad, D.M. Sadek, An investigation on Portland cement replaced by high-volume GGBS pastes modified with micro-sized metakaolin subjected to elevated temperatures, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. (2016). [5] A.O. Sojobi, Evaluation of the performance of eco-friendly lightweight interlocking concrete paving units incorporating sawdust wastes and laterite, Cogent Eng. 3 (1) (2016) 1255168. [6] R. Jin, Q. Chen, An investigation of current status of ‘‘green” concrete in the construction industry, 49th ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings, 2013. [7] A. Baikerikar, A Review on Green Concrete, J. Emerging Technol. Innovative Res. 1 (6) (2014) 472–474. [8] O.M. Jensen, P.F. Hansen, Autogenous deformation and RH-change in perspective, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (12) (2001) 1859–1865. [9] D. Thorpe, Y. Zhuge, Advantages and disadvantages in using permeable concrete pavement as a pavement construction material, Assoc. Res. Constr. Manage. 6 (8) (2010) 1341–1350. [10] R. Woodward, N. Duffy, Cement and concrete flow analysis in a rapidly expanding economy: Ireland as a case study, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 55 (4) (2011) 448–455. [11] M.K. Dash, S.K. Patro, A.K. Rath, Sustainable use of industrial-waste as partial replacement of fine aggregate for preparation of concrete–A review, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 5 (2) (2016) 484–516. [12] J.H. Wesseling, A. van der Vooren, Lock-in of mature innovation systems, The transformation toward clean concrete in the Netherlands, Lund University, CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy, 2016. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1087
- 27. [13] M.S. Imbabi,C. Carrigan, S. McKenna, Trends and developments in green cement and concrete technology, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 1 (2) (2012) 194–216. [14] C. Hu, Y. Han, Y. Gao, Y. Zhang, Z. Li, Property investigation of calcium– silicate–hydrate (C–S–H) gel in cementitious composites, Mater. Charact. 95 (2014) 129–139. [15] S.A. Saad, M.F. Nuruddin, N. Shafiq, M. Ali, The Effect of Incineration Temperature to the Chemical and Physical Properties of Ultrafine Treated Rice Husk Ash (UFTRHA) as Supplementary Cementing Material (SCM), Procedia Eng. 148 (2016) 163–167. [16] G. Cordeiro, R. Toledo Filho, L. Tavares, E. Fairbairn, Experimental characterization of binary and ternary blended-cement concretes containing ultrafine residual rice husk and sugar cane bagasse ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 29 (2012) 641–646. [17] C.-L. Hwang, T.-P. Huynh, Effect of alkali-activator and rice husk ash content on strength development of fly ash and residual rice husk ash-based geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 1–9. [18] S.M. Kazmi, S. Abbas, M.A. Saleem, M.J. Munir, A. Khitab, Manufacturing of sustainable clay bricks: Utilization of waste sugarcane bagasse and rice husk ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 120 (2016) 29–41. [19] K. Kunchariyakun, S. Asavapisit, K. Sombatsompop, Properties of autoclaved aerated concrete incorporating rice husk ash as partial replacement for fine aggregate, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 11–16. [20] G. Sua-iam, P. Sokrai, N. Makul, Novel ternary blends of Type 1 Portland cement, residual rice husk ash, and limestone powder to improve the properties of self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 1028–1034. [21] S. Hesami, S. Ahmadi, M. Nematzadeh, Effects of rice husk ash and fiber on mechanical properties of pervious concrete pavement, Constr. Build. Mater. 53 (2014) 680–691. [22] E. Mohseni, F. Naseri, R. Amjadi, M.M. Khotbehsara, M.M. Ranjbar, Microstructure and durability properties of cement mortars containing nano-TiO2 and rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 656–664. [23] F. Zunino, M. Lopez, Decoupling the physical and chemical effects of supplementary cementitious materials on strength and permeability: a multi-level approach, Cement Concr. Compos. 65 (2016) 19–28. [24] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, L.M. Tavares, E.d.M.R. Fairbairn, S. Hempel, Influence of particle size and specific surface area on the pozzolanic activity of residual rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 33 (5) (2011) 529–534. [25] G.A. Habeeb, H.B. Mahmud, Study on properties of rice husk ash and its use as cement replacement material, Mater. Res. 13 (2) (2010) 185–190. [26] A.N. Givi, S.A. Rashid, F.N.A. Aziz, M.A.M. Salleh, Assessment of the effects of rice husk ash particle size on strength, water permeability and workability of binary blended concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (11) (2010) 2145–2150. [27] F. Zunino, M. Lopez, A methodology for assessing the chemical and physical potential of industrially sourced rice husk ash on strength development and early-age hydration of cement paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 149 (2017) 869– 881. [28] M. Cyr, P. Lawrence, E. Ringot, Mineral admixtures in mortars: quantification of the physical effects of inert materials on short-term hydration, Cement Concr. Res. 35 (4) (2005) 719–730. [29] M. Cyr, P. Lawrence, E. Ringot, Efficiency of mineral admixtures in mortars: quantification of the physical and chemical effects of fine admixtures in relation with compressive strength, Cement Concr. Res. 36 (2) (2006) 264– 277. [30] K. Ganesan, K. Rajagopal, K. Thangavel, Rice husk ash blended cement: assessment of optimal level of replacement for strength and permeability properties of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (8) (2008) 1675–1683. [31] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, L.M. Tavares, E.D.M.R. Fairbairn, Ultrafine grinding of sugar cane bagasse ash for application as pozzolanic admixture in concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 39 (2) (2009) 110–115. [32] H.T. Le, H.-M. Ludwig, Effect of rice husk ash and other mineral admixtures on properties of self-compacting high performance concrete, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 156–166. [33] E. Nimwinya, W. Arjharn, S. Horpibulsuk, T. Phoo-Ngernkham, A. Poowancum, A sustainable calcined water treatment sludge and rice husk ash geopolymer, J. Cleaner Prod. 119 (2016) 128–134. [34] A. Gastaldini, M. Da Silva, F. Zamberlan, C.M. Neto, Total shrinkage, chloride penetration, and compressive strength of concretes that contain clear-colored rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 369–377. [35] M. Jamil, A. Kaish, S.N. Raman, M.F.M. Zain, Pozzolanic contribution of rice husk ash in cementitious system, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 588–593. [36] D. Salazar-Carreño, R.G. García-Cáceres, O.O. Ortiz-Rodríguez, Laboratory processing of Colombian rice husk for obtaining amorphous silica as concrete supplementary cementing material, Constr. Build. Mater. 96 (2015) 65–75. [37] Ö. Çakır, Ö.Ö. Sofyanlı, Influence of silica fume on mechanical and physical properties of recycled aggregate concrete, HBRC J. 11 (2) (2015) 157–166. [38] P. Choi, J.H. Yeon, K.-K. Yun, Air-void structure, strength, and permeability of wet-mix shotcrete before and after shotcreting operation: The influences of silica fume and air-entraining agent, Cement Concr. Compos. 70 (2016) 69– 77. [39] M. Jalal, A. Pouladkhan, O.F. Harandi, D. Jafari, Comparative study on effects of Class F fly ash, nano silica and silica fume on properties of high performance self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 90–104. [40] M. Mastali, A. Dalvand, Use of silica fume and recycled steel fibers in self- compacting concrete (SCC), Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 196–209. [41] E. Papa, V. Medri, D. Kpogbemabou, V. Morinière, J. Laumonier, A. Vaccari, S. Rossignol, Porosity and insulating properties of silica-fume based foams, Energy Build. 131 (2016) 223–232. [42] A. Sadrmomtazi, J. Sobhani, M. Mirgozar, M. Najimi, Properties of multi- strength grade EPS concrete containing silica fume and rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 211–219. [43] M.E.-S.I. Saraya, Study physico-chemical properties of blended cements containing fixed amount of silica fume, blast furnace slag, basalt and limestone, a comparative study, Constr. Build. Mater. 72 (2014) 104–112. [44] A. Tamimi, N.M. Hassan, K. Fattah, A. Talachi, Performance of cementitious materials produced by incorporating surface treated multiwall carbon nanotubes and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 934–945. [45] Z. Li, H.K. Venkata, P.R. Rangaraju, Influence of silica flour–silica fume combination on the properties of high performance cementitious mixtures at ambient temperature curing, Constr. Build. Mater. 100 (2015) 225–233. [46] J. Sobhani, M. Najimi, Electrochemical impedance behavior and transport properties of silica fume contained concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 910–918. [47] Z. Zhang, B. Zhang, P. Yan, Comparative study of effect of raw and densified silica fume in the paste, mortar and concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 105 (2016) 82–93. [48] R. Khatri, V. Sirivivatnanon, W. Gross, Effect of different supplementary cementitious materials on mechanical properties of high performance concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (1) (1995) 209–220. [49] M. Buil, P. Acker, Creep of a silica fume concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 15 (3) (1985) 463–466. [50] F. De Larrard, J.-L. Bostvironnois, On the long–term strength losses of silica– fume high–strength concretes, Mag. Concr. Res. 43 (155) (1991) 109–119. [51] P. Sandberg, Chloride initiated reinforcement corrosion in marine concrete, Rep. TVBM 1015 (1998). [52] R. Chen, Y. Li, R. Xiang, S. Li, Effect of particle size of fly ash on the properties of lightweight insulation materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 120–126. [53] N. Chousidis, I. Ioannou, E. Rakanta, C. Koutsodontis, G. Batis, Effect of fly ash chemical composition on the reinforcement corrosion, thermal diffusion and strength of blended cement concretes, Constr. Build. Mater. 126 (2016) 86– 97. [54] W.-J. Fan, X.-Y. Wang, K.-B. Park, Evaluation of the chemical and mechanical properties of hardening high-calcium fly ash blended concrete, Materials 8 (9) (2015) 5933–5952. [55] M.Z.N. Khan, Y. Hao, H. Hao, Synthesis of high strength ambient cured geopolymer composite by using low calcium fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 809–820. [56] A. Noushini, F. Aslani, A. Castel, R.I. Gilbert, B. Uy, S. Foster, Compressive stress-strain model for low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer and heat-cured Portland cement concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 73 (2016) 136–146. [57] P. Shafigh, M.A. Nomeli, U.J. Alengaram, H.B. Mahmud, M.Z. Jumaat, Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete containing limestone powder and high volume fly ash, J. Cleaner Prod. 135 (2016) 148–157. [58] H. Tian, Y. Zhang, L. Ye, C. Yang, Mechanical behaviours of green hybrid fibre- reinforced cementitious composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 95 (2015) 152–163. [59] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, H.A. Salem, Effect of cement addition, solution resting time and curing characteristics on fly ash based geopolymer concrete performance, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 581–593. [60] Y. Park, A. Abolmaali, Y.H. Kim, M. Ghahremannejad, Compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete with crumb rubber partially replacing sand, Constr. Build. Mater. 118 (2016) 43–51. [61] M. Thomas, Optimizing the use of fly ash in concrete, Portland Cement Association Skokie, IL, USA2007. [62] T.C. Madhavi, L.S. Raju, D. Mathur, Durabilty and strength properties of high volume fly ash concrete, J. Civil Eng. Res. 4 (2A) (2014) 7–11. [63] R. Kurad, J.D. Silvestre, J. de Brito, H. Ahmed, Effect of incorporation of high volume of recycled concrete aggregates and fly ash on the strength and global warming potential of concrete, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017). [64] S. Wang, L. Baxter, Comprehensive study of biomass fly ash in concrete: Strength, microscopy, kinetics and durability, Fuel Process. Technol. 88 (11) (2007) 1165–1170. [65] K. Neupane, Fly ash and GGBFS based powder-activated geopolymer binders: A viable sustainable alternative of portland cement in concrete industry, Mech. Mater. 103 (2016) 110–122. [66] N. Rakhimova, R. Rakhimov, Individual and combined effects of Portland cement-based hydrated mortar components on alkali-activated slag cement, Constr. Build. Mater. 73 (2014) 515–522. [67] Ö. Çakır, F. Aköz, Effect of curing conditions on the mortars with and without GGBFS, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (3) (2008) 308–314. [68] E. Özbay, M. Erdemir, H._I. Durmusß, Utilization and efficiency of ground granulated blast furnace slag on concrete properties–A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 105 (2016) 423–434. [69] S. Chidiac, D. Panesar, Evolution of mechanical properties of concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag and effects on the scaling resistance test at 28 days, Cement Concr. Compos. 30 (2) (2008) 63–71. 1088 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 28. [70] M. Shariq,J. Prasad, A. Masood, Effect of GGBFS on time dependent compressive strength of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (8) (2010) 1469– 1478. [71] H.J. Yim, J.H. Kim, S.H. Han, H.-G. Kwak, Influence of Portland cement and ground-granulated blast-furnace slag on bleeding of fresh mix, Constr. Build. Mater. 80 (2015) 132–140. [72] J. Bijen, Durability aspects of the King Fahd causeway, Concrete in hot climates, Proceedings OF the third international conference held by Rilem (The international union of testing and research laboratories for materials and testing), September 21–25, 1992, Torquay, England, 1992. [73] J. Wiebenga, Durability of concrete structures along the North Sea coast of the Netherlands, Spec. Publ. 65 (1980) 437–452. [74] J. Bijen, Benefits of slag and fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (5) (1996) 309– 314. [75] P. Munoz, O. Morales, G. Letelier, H. Mendivil, Fired clay bricks made by adding wastes: assessment of the impact on physical, mechanical and thermal properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 241–252. [76] R.M. Novais, G. Ascensão, M. Seabra, J. Labrincha, Waste glass from end-of-life fluorescent lamps as raw material in geopolymers, Waste Manage. 52 (2016) 245–255. [77] X. Wang, D. Feng, B. Zhang, Z. Li, C. Li, Y. Zhu, Effect of KNO3 on the microstruture and physical properties of glass foam from solid waste glass and SiC powder, Mater. Lett. 169 (2016) 21–23. [78] Y.-L. Wei, S.-H. Cheng, G.-W. Ko, Effect of waste glass addition on lightweight aggregates prepared from F-class coal fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 773–782. [79] R. Yu, D. van Onna, P. Spiesz, Q. Yu, H. Brouwers, Development of ultra- lightweight fibre reinforced concrete applying expanded waste glass, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 690–701. [80] J.L. Calmon, A.S. Sauer, G.L. Vieira, J.E.S.L. Teixeira, Effects of windshield waste glass on the properties of structural repair mortars, Cement Concr. Compos. 53 (2014) 88–96. [81] A. Jamshidi, K. Kurumisawa, T. Nawa, T. Igarashi, Performance of pavements incorporating waste glass: the current state of the art, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 64 (2016) 211–236. [82] J.M. Juoi, D. Arudra, Z.M. Rosli, K. Hussain, A.J. Jaafar, Microstructural properties of glass composite material made from incinerated scheduled waste slag and soda lime silicate (SLS) waste glass, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 367 (2013) 8–13. [83] J. Pastor, L. García, S. Quintana, J. Peña, Glass reinforced concrete panels containing recycled tyres: evaluation of the acoustic properties of for their use as sound barriers, Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 541–549. [84] J. Kim, J.-H. Moon, J.W. Shim, J. Sim, H.-G. Lee, G. Zi, Durability properties of a concrete with waste glass sludge exposed to freeze-and-thaw condition and de-icing salt, Constr. Building Mater. 66 (2014) 398–402. [85] S.-C. Kou, C.-S. Poon, A novel polymer concrete made with recycled glass aggregates, fly ash and metakaolin, Constr. Build. Mater. 41 (2013) 146–151. [86] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, A.Y. Aboshama, Utilization of waste glass powder in the production of cement and concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 124 (2016) 866–877. [87] R. Madandoust, R. Ghavidel, Mechanical properties of concrete containing waste glass powder and rice husk ash, Biosystems Eng. 116 (2) (2013) 113– 119. [88] Z.Z. Ismail, E.A. Al-Hashmi, Recycling of waste glass as a partial replacement for fine aggregate in concrete, Waste management 29 (2) (2009) 655–659. [89] C. Shi, R.L. Day, Pozzolanic reaction in the presence of chemical activators: Part I. Reaction kinetics, Cement Concr. Res. 30 (1) (2000) 51–58. [90] F. Sajedi, H.A. Razak, Effects of thermal and mechanical activation methods on compressive strength of ordinary Portland cement–slag mortar, Mater. Des. 32 (2) (2011) 984–995. [91] M. Mirzahosseini, K.A. Riding, Effect of curing temperature and glass type on the pozzolanic reactivity of glass powder, Cem. Concr. Res. 58 (2014) 103– 111. [92] C. Shi, R.L. Day, Comparison of different methods for enhancing reactivity of pozzolans, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (5) (2001) 813–818. [93] J. Qian, C. Shi, Z. Wang, Activation of blended cements containing fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (8) (2001) 1121–1127. [94] M. Ibrahim, M.A.M. Johari, M.K. Rahman, M. Maslehuddin, Effect of alkaline activators and binder content on the properties of natural pozzolan-based alkali activated concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 147 (2017) 648–660. [95] A.G. Vayghan, A. Khaloo, F. Rajabipour, The effects of a hydrochloric acid pre- treatment on the physicochemical properties and pozzolanic performance of rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 39 (2013) 131–140. [96] Z. Wu, T.R. Naik, Properties of concrete produced from multicomponent blended cements, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (12) (2002) 1937–1942. [97] V. Zˇivica, Effects of type and dosage of alkaline activator and temperature on the properties of alkali-activated slag mixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (7) (2007) 1463–1469. [98] T. Bakharev, J. Sanjayan, Y.-B. Cheng, Effect of admixtures on properties of alkali-activated slag concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (9) (2000) 1367–1374. [99] A. Nazari, S. Riahi, The effects of TiO2 nanoparticles on physical, thermal and mechanical properties of concrete using ground granulated blast furnace slag as binder, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 528 (4) (2011) 2085–2092. [100] S. Kawashima, P. Hou, D.J. Corr, S.P. Shah, Modification of cement-based materials with nanoparticles, Cement Concr. Compos. 36 (2013) 8–15. [101] S. Antiohos, A. Papageorgiou, V. Papadakis, S. Tsimas, Influence of quicklime addition on the mechanical properties and hydration degree of blended cements containing different fly ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (6) (2008) 1191–1200. [102] S. Antiohos, S. Tsimas, Activation of fly ash cementitious systems in the presence of quicklime: Part I. Compressive strength and pozzolanic reaction rate, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (5) (2004) 769–779. [103] L. Federico, S. Chidiac, Waste glass as a supplementary cementitious material in concrete–critical review of treatment methods, Cement Concr. Compos. 31 (8) (2009) 606–610. [104] P.S. Deb, P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, The effects of ground granulated blast-furnace slag blending with fly ash and activator content on the workability and strength properties of geopolymer concrete cured at ambient temperature, Mater. Des. 62 (2014) 32–39. [105] A. Gastaldini, G. Isaia, N. Gomes, J. Sperb, Chloride penetration and carbonation in concrete with rice husk ash and chemical activators, Cement Concr. Compos. 29 (3) (2007) 176–180. [106] G. Li, Properties of high-volume fly ash concrete incorporating nano-SiO2, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (6) (2004) 1043–1049. [107] P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Use of OPC to improve setting and early strength properties of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete cured at room temperature, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 205–214. [108] Y. Qing, Z. Zenan, K. Deyu, C. Rongshen, Influence of nano-SiO2 addition on properties of hardened cement paste as compared with silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (3) (2007) 539–545. [109] S.A. Bernal, E.D. Rodríguez, R.M. de Gutiérrez, J.L. Provis, S. Delvasto, Activation of metakaolin/slag blends using alkaline solutions based on chemically modified silica fume and rice husk ash, Waste Biomass Valorization 3 (1) (2012) 99–108. [110] R. Kumar, S. Kumar, S. Mehrotra, Towards sustainable solutions for fly ash through mechanical activation, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 52 (2) (2007) 157– 179. [111] F. Blanco, M. Garcia, J. Ayala, Variation in fly ash properties with milling and acid leaching, Fuel 84 (1) (2005) 89–96. [112] A. Fernández-Jiménez, A. Palomo, Composition and microstructure of alkali activated fly ash binder: effect of the activator, Cement Concr. Res. 35 (10) (2005) 1984–1992. [113] A.S. De Vargas, D.C. Dal Molin, A.C. Vilela, F.J. Da Silva, B. Pavao, H. Veit, The effects of Na2 O/SiO2 molar ratio, curing temperature and age on compressive strength, morphology and microstructure of alkali-activated fly ash-based geopolymers, Cement Concr. Compos. 33 (6) (2011) 653–660. [114] A.M. Rashad, M.H. Khalil, A preliminary study of alkali-activated slag blended with silica fume under the effect of thermal loads and thermal shock cycles, Constr. Build. Mater. 40 (2013) 522–532. [115] M. Shatat, Hydration behavior and mechanical properties of blended cement containing various amounts of rice husk ash in presence of metakaolin, Arabian J. Chem. 9 (2016) S1869–S1874. [116] H. Huang, X. Gao, H. Wang, H. Ye, Influence of rice husk ash on strength and permeability of ultra-high performance concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 149 (2017) 621–628. [117] H.S. Müller, R. Breiner, J.S. Moffatt, M. Haist, Design and properties of sustainable concrete, Procedia Eng. 95 (2014) 290–304. [118] M.A. Elrahman, B. Hillemeier, Combined effect of fine fly ash and packing density on the properties of high performance concrete: An experimental approach, Constr. Build. Mater. 58 (2014) 225–233. [119] A. Kar, I. Ray, A. Unnikrishnan, J.F. Davalos, Microanalysis and optimization- based estimation of C-S–H contents of cementitious systems containing fly ash and silica fume, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (3) (2012) 419–429. [120] S. Hua, K. Wang, X. Yao, Developing high performance phosphogypsum- based cementitious materials for oil-well cementing through a step-by-step optimization method, Cement Concr. Compos. 72 (2016) 299–308. [121] T. Proske, S. Hainer, M. Rezvani, C.-A. Graubner, Eco-friendly concretes with reduced water and cement contents—Mix design principles and laboratory tests, Cem. Concr. Res. 51 (2013) 38–46. [122] R. Cepuritis, S. Jacobsen, T. Onnela, Sand production with VSI crushing and air classification: optimising fines grading for concrete production with micro- proportioning, Miner. Eng. 78 (2015) 1–14. [123] R. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Development of an eco-friendly Ultra-High Performance Concrete (UHPC) with efficient cement and mineral admixtures uses, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 383–394. [124] B. Akcay, M.A. Tasdemir, Optimisation of using lightweight aggregates in mitigating autogenous deformation of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (1) (2009) 353–363. [125] B.E. Jimma, P.R. Rangaraju, Chemical admixtures dose optimization in pervious concrete paste selection–A statistical approach, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 1047–1058. [126] N.U. Kockal, T. Ozturan, Optimization of properties of fly ash aggregates for high-strength lightweight concrete production, Mater. Des. 32 (6) (2011) 3586–3593. [127] N. Tošic´, S. Marinkovic´, T. Dašic´, M. Stanic´, Multicriteria optimization of natural and recycled aggregate concrete for structural use, J. Cleaner Prod. 87 (2015) 766–776. [128] H. Binici, O. Aksogan, I.H. Cagatay, M. Tokyay, E. Emsen, The effect of particle size distribution on the properties of blended cements incorporating GGBFS and natural pozzolan (NP), Powder Technol. 177 (3) (2007) 140–147. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1089
- 29. [129] V. Tamilarasan,P. Perumal, D. Maheswaran, Workability studies on concrete with GGBS as a replacement material for cement with and without superplasticiser, in: International journal of advanced research in engineering and technology (IJARET), 2012, pp. 11–21. [130] D.P. Bentz, C.F. Ferraris, K.A. Snyder, Best practices guide for high-volume fly ash concretes: Assuring properties and performance, 2013. [131] H.A. Alaka, L.O. Oyedele, High volume fly ash concrete: The practical impact of using superabundant dose of high range water reducer, J. Build. Eng. 8 (2016) 81–90. [132] L. Yijin, Z. Shiqiong, Y. Jian, G. Yingli, The effect of fly ash on the fluidity of cement paste, mortar, and concrete, in: International workshop on Sustainable Development and Concrete Technology, Beijing, China, 2004, pp. 339–345. [133] S. Mukherjee, S. Mandal, U. Adhikari, Comparative study on physical and mechanical properties of high Slump and zero slump high volume fly ash concrete (HVFAC), Global NEST J. 20 (10) (2013) 1–7. [134] B. Keertana, S. Gobhiga, Experimental study of concrete with partial replacement of cement with rice husk ash and fine aggregate with granite dust, IRACST-Eng. Sci. Technol.: Int. J. 6 (1) (2016) 36–41. [135] A. Abalaka, Strength and some durability properties of concrete containing rice husk ash produced in a charcoal incinerator at low specific surface, Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 7 (4) (2013) 287–293. [136] S.R. Hunchate, S. Chandupalle, V.G. Ghorpode, R. Venkata, Mix design of high performance concrete using silica fume and superplasticizer, Pan 18 (1.8) (2014) 100. [137] N. Amarkhail, Effects of silica fume on properties of high strength concrete, Int. J. Tech. Res. Appl. 32 (2015) 13–19. [138] S.K. Karri, G.R. Rao, P.M. Raju, Strength and Durability Studies on GGBS Concrete, SSRG Int. J. Civil Eng. 2 (2015). [139] S. Arivalagan, Sustainable studies on concrete with ggbs as a replacement material in cement, Jordan J. Civil Eng. 8 (3) (2014) 263–270. [140] H.T. Le, K. Siewert, H.-M. Ludwig, Alkali silica reaction in mortar formulated from self-compacting high performance concrete containing rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 88 (2015) 10–19. [141] A. Ikpong, D. Okpala, Strength characteristics of medium workability ordinary Portland cement-rice husk ash concrete, Build. Environ. 27 (1) (1992) 105– 111. [142] H.K. Venkatanarayanan, P.R. Rangaraju, Effect of grinding of low-carbon rice husk ash on the microstructure and performance properties of blended cement concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 348–363. [143] M.I. Malik, M. Bashir, S. Ahmad, T. Tariq, U. Chowdhary, Study of concrete involving use of waste glass as partial replacement of fine aggregates, IOSR J. Eng. (2013) 2278–8719. [144] H. Liang, H. Zhu, E. Byars, Use of waste glass as aggregates in concrete, in: 7th UK CARE Annual General Meeting, Greenwich, 2007, pp. 1–7. [145] S. Abdallah, M. Fan, Characteristics of concrete with waste glass as fine aggregate replacement, Int. J. Eng. Tech. Res. 2 (5) (2014) 11–17. [146] H. Xu, W. Gong, L. Syltebo, K. Izzo, W. Lutze, I.L. Pegg, Effect of blast furnace slag grades on fly ash based geopolymer waste forms, Fuel 133 (2014) 332– 340. [147] N. Bouzoubaa, M. Lachemi, Self-compacting concrete incorporating high volumes of class F fly ash: preliminary results, Cement Concr. Res. 31 (3) (2001) 413–420. [148] J. Brooks, M.M. Johari, M. Mazloom, Effect of admixtures on the setting times of high-strength concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 22 (4) (2000) 293–301. [149] D. Ravina, P.K. Mehta, Properties of fresh concrete containing large amounts of fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 16 (2) (1986) 227–238. [150] T. Nochaiya, W. Wongkeo, A. Chaipanich, Utilization of fly ash with silica fume and properties of Portland cement–fly ash–silica fume concrete, Fuel 89 (3) (2010) 768–774. [151] K.-L. Lin, H.-S. Shiu, J.-L. Shie, T.-W. Cheng, C.-L. Hwang, Effect of composition on characteristics of thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) waste glass-metakaolin-based geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 501–507. [152] H.-Y. Wang, The effect of the proportion of thin film transistor–liquid crystal display (TFT–LCD) optical waste glass as a partial substitute for cement in cement mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 791–797. [153] L. Shen, Role of Aggregate Packing in Segregation Resistance and Flow Behavior of self-Consolidating Concrete, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, 2007. [154] Y. Xie, B. Liu, J. Yin, S. Zhou, Optimum mix parameters of high-strength self- compacting concrete with ultrapulverized fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (3) (2002) 477–480. [155] M. Rahman, A. Muntohar, V. Pakrashi, B. Nagaratnam, D. Sujan, Self compacting concrete from uncontrolled burning of rice husk and blended fine aggregate, Mater. Des. 55 (2014) 410–415. [156] Z. Wu, Y. Zhang, J. Zheng, Y. Ding, An experimental study on the workability of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (5) (2009) 2087–2092. [157] H. Yazıcı, The effect of silica fume and high-volume Class C fly ash on mechanical properties, chloride penetration and freeze–thaw resistance of self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (4) (2008) 456–462. [158] A.F. Bingöl, _I. Tohumcu, Effects of different curing regimes on the compressive strength properties of self compacting concrete incorporating fly ash and silica fume, Mater. Des. 51 (2013) 12–18. [159] M. Gesog˘lu, E. Güneyisi, E. Özbay, Properties of self-compacting concretes made with binary, ternary, and quaternary cementitious blends of fly ash, blast furnace slag, and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (5) (2009) 1847– 1854. [160] R. Duval, E. Kadri, Influence of silica fume on the workability and the compressive strength of high-performance concretes, Cement Concr. Res. 28 (4) (1998) 533–547. [161] N.S. Msinjili, W. Schmidt, A. Rogge, H.-C. Kühne, Performance of rice husk ash blended cementitious systems with added superplasticizers, Cement Concr. Compos. (2017). [162] A. Karthik, K. Sudalaimani, C.V. Kumar, Investigation on mechanical properties of fly ash-ground granulated blast furnace slag based self curing bio-geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 149 (2017) 338–349. [163] M.S. Ismail, A. Waliuddin, Effect of rice husk ash on high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (7) (1996) 521–526. [164] M. Heikal, M. Morsy, I. Aiad, Effect of treatment temperature on the early hydration characteristics of superplasticized silica fume blended cement pastes, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (4) (2005) 680–687. [165] J.E. Ujhelyi, A.J. Ibrahim, Hot weather concreting with hydraulic additives, Cement Concr. Res. 21 (2–3) (1991) 345–354. [166] E.E. Ali, S.H. Al-Tersawy, Recycled glass as a partial replacement for fine aggregate in self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 785– 791. [167] R. Vinai, A. Rafeet, M. Soutsos, W. Sha, The role of water content and paste proportion on physico-mechanical properties of alkali activated fly ash-ggbs concrete, J. Sustainable Metall. 2 (1) (2016) 51–61. [168] O. Boukendakdji, E.-H. Kadri, S. Kenai, Effects of granulated blast furnace slag and superplasticizer type on the fresh properties and compressive strength of self-compacting concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (4) (2012) 583–590. [169] R. Siddique, R. Bennacer, Use of iron and steel industry by-product (GGBS) in cement paste and mortar, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 69 (2012) 29–34. [170] P. Wainwright, H. Ait-Aider, The influence of cement source and slag additions on the bleeding of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (7) (1995) 1445– 1456. [171] W. Xu, Y.T. Lo, D. Ouyang, S.A. Memon, F. Xing, W. Wang, X. Yuan, Effect of rice husk ash fineness on porosity and hydration reaction of blended cement paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 89 (2015) 90–101. [172] M. Benaicha, X. Roguiez, O. Jalbaud, Y. Burtschell, A.H. Alaoui, Influence of silica fume and viscosity modifying agent on the mechanical and rheological behavior of self compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 84 (2015) 103– 110. [173] P. Chindaprasirt, C. Jaturapitakkul, W. Chalee, U. Rattanasak, Comparative study on the characteristics of fly ash and bottom ash geopolymers, Waste Manage. 29 (2) (2009) 539–543. [174] A. Kumar, D. Gupta, Behavior of cement-stabilized fiber-reinforced pond ash, rice husk ash–soil mixtures, Geotext. Geomembr. 44 (3) (2016) 466–474. [175] M. Shatat, Hydration behavior and mechanical properties of blended cement containing various amounts of rice husk ash in presence of metakaolin, Arabian J. Chem. (2014). [176] E. Mohseni, M.M. Khotbehsara, F. Naseri, M. Monazami, P. Sarker, Polypropylene fiber reinforced cement mortars containing rice husk ash and nano-alumina, Constr. Build. Mater. 111 (2016) 429–439. [177] S.P. Patil, K.K. Sangle, Shear and flexural behaviour of prestressed and non- prestressed plain and SFRC concrete beams, J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. (2016). [178] S.H. Sathawane, V.S. Vairagade, K.S. Kene, Combine effect of rice husk ash and fly ash on concrete by 30% cement replacement, Procedia Eng. 51 (2013) 35– 44. [179] P. Walczak, J. Małolepszy, M. Reben, K. Rzepa, Mechanical properties of concrete mortar based on mixture of CRT glass cullet and fluidized fly ash, Procedia Eng. 108 (2015) 453–458. [180] A. Alhozaimy, P. Soroushian, F. Mirza, Mechanical properties of polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete and the effects of pozzolanic materials, Cement Concr. Compos. 18 (2) (1996) 85–92. [181] S. Barbhuiya, S. Mukherjee, H. Nikraz, Effects of nano-Al2 O3 on early-age microstructural properties of cement paste, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014) 189–193. [182] J.N. Karadelis, Y. Lin, Flexural strengths and fibre efficiency of steel-fibre- reinforced, roller-compacted, polymer modified concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 93 (2015) 498–505. [183] M. Tatikonda, Modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of concrete containing rice husk ash, Int. J. Adv. Found. Res. Sci. Eng. 1 (2015) 218–225. [184] F.A.W. Chik, B.H.A. Bakar, M.A.M. Johari, R.P. Jaya, Properties of concrete block containing rice husk ash subjected to GIRHA, Int. J. Res. Rev. Appl. Sci. 8 (1) (2011) 57–64. [185] R. Siddique, D. Kaur, Properties of concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) at elevated temperatures, Journal of Advanced Research 3 (1) (2012) 45–51. [186] P. Rovnaník, B. Rˇezník, P. Rovnaníková, Blended Alkali-activated Fly Ash/Brick Powder Materials, Procedia Eng. 151 (2016) 108–113. [187] O. Kayali, Fly ash lightweight aggregates in high performance concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (12) (2008) 2393–2399. [188] B. Haranki, Strength, Modulus of Elasticity, Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete used in Florida, University of Florida, 2009. 1090 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 30. [189] M. SerdarD. Bjegovic I.S. Oslakovic Shrinkage and creep of concrete prepared with quaternary blended cement 2009 International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering IABSE Symposium Report 123 131 [190] Z.-H. He, L.-Y. Li, S.-G. Du, Creep analysis of concrete containing rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 80 (2017) 190–199. [191] M. Mazloom, A. Ramezanianpour, J. Brooks, Effect of silica fume on mechanical properties of high-strength concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 26 (4) (2004) 347–357. [192] S.A. Kristiawan, A.P. Nugroho, Creep Behaviour of Self-compacting Concrete Incorporating High Volume Fly Ash and its Effect on the Long-term Deflection of Reinforced Concrete Beam, Procedia Eng. 171 (2017) 715–724. [193] T. Barrett, I. De la Varga, J. Schlitter, W. Weiss, Reducing the risk of cracking in high volume fly ash concrete by using internal curing, World of Coal Ash Conference, Denver, CO, 2011. [194] C.D. Atisß, High-volume fly ash concrete with high strength and low drying shrinkage, J. Mater. Civil Eng. 15 (2) (2003) 153–156. [195] X. Ling, Optimising short-term and long-term properties of high-volume fly ash (HVFA) concrete, 2015. [196] P. Havlásek, M. Jirásek, Multiscale modeling of drying shrinkage and creep of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 85 (2016) 55–74. [197] S. Wallah, B.V. Rangan, Low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete: long-term properties, 2006. [198] K. Folliard, C. Smith, G. Sellers, M. Brown, J. Breen, Evaluation of alternative materials to control drying-shrinkage cracking in concrete bridge decks, 2003. [199] S. Wallah, Creep behaviour of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Civil Engineering Dimension 12 (2) (2010) 73–78. [200] H.-H. Hung, Properties of High Volume Fly Ash Concrete, University of Sheffield, 1997. [201] J. Cripwell, J. Brooks, P. Wainwright, Time-dependent properties of concrete containing pulverised fuel ash and a superplasticizer, in: Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Ash Technology and Marketing, Central Electricity Generating Board, London, 1984, pp. 115–120. [202] P. Gifford, M. Ward, Results of laboratory test on lean mass concrete utilising fly ash to a high level of cement replacement, Proc. Int. Symp. (1982) 221– 229. [203] R.L. Yuan, J.E. Cook, Study of a class C fly ash concrete, Spec. Publ. 79 (1983) 307–320. [204] R. Lohtia, B. Nautiyal, O. Jain, Creep of fly ash concrete, J. Proc. (1976) 469– 472. [205] A.E. Klausen, T. Kanstad, Ø. Bjøntegaard, E. Sellevold, Comparison of tensile and compressive creep of fly ash concretes in the hardening phase, Cem. Concr. Res. 95 (2017) 188–194. [206] J. Forth, Predicting the tensile creep of concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 55 (2015) 70–80. [207] W. Yang, Y. Xue, S. Wu, Y. Xiao, M. Zhou, Performance investigation and environmental application of basic oxygen furnace slag–Rice husk ash based composite cementitious materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 493–500. [208] A. Parghi, M.S. Alam, Physical and mechanical properties of cementitious composites containing recycled glass powder (RGP) and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), Constr. Build. Mater. 104 (2016) 34–43. [209] H. Binici, Engineering properties of geopolymer incorporating slag, fly ash, silica sand and pumice, Adv. Civ. Environ. Eng 1 (3) (2013) 108–123. [210] H. Tian, Y. Zhang, The influence of bagasse fibre and fly ash on the long-term properties of green cementitious composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 111 (2016) 237–250. [211] A.S. Momtazi, R.Z. Zanoosh, The effects of polypropylene fibers and rubber particles on mechanical properties of cement composite containing rice husk ash, Procedia Eng. 10 (2011) 3608–3615. [212] R. Siddique, K. Singh, M. Singh, V. Corinaldesi, A. Rajor, Properties of bacterial rice husk ash concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 112–119. [213] A.R. Bog˘a, M. Öztürk, _I.B. Topçu, Using ANN and ANFIS to predict the mechanical and chloride permeability properties of concrete containing GGBFS and CNI, Compos. B Eng. 45 (1) (2013) 688–696. [214] K. Hassan, J. Cabrera, R. Maliehe, The effect of mineral admixtures on the properties of high-performance concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 22 (4) (2000) 267–271. [215] M. Rostami, K. Behfarnia, The effect of silica fume on durability of alkali activated slag concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 262–268. [216] S.A. Zareei, F. Ameri, F. Dorostkar, M. Ahmadi, Rice husk ash as a partial replacement of cement in high strength concrete containing micro silica: Evaluating durability and mechanical properties, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. (2017). [217] A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho, Durability of mortar using waste glass powder as cement replacement, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 205–215. [218] A. Cheng, R. Huang, J.-K. Wu, C.-H. Chen, Influence of GGBS on durability and corrosion behavior of reinforced concrete, Mater. Chem. Phys. 93 (2) (2005) 404–411. [219] D.W. Mokarem, R.E. Weyers, D.S. Lane, Development of a shrinkage performance specifications and prediction model analysis for supplemental cementitious material concrete mixtures, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (5) (2005) 918– 925. [220] M. Balapour, A. Ramezanianpour, E. Hajibandeh, An investigation on mechanical and durability properties of mortars containing nano and micro RHA, Constr. Build. Mater. 132 (2017) 470–477. [221] F. Christopher, A. Bolatito, S. Ahmed, Structure and properties of mortar and concrete with rice husk ash as partial replacement of ordinary portland cement–A review, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. (2017). [222] V. Ramachandran, Alkali-aggregate expansion inhibiting admixtures, Cement Concr. Compos. 20 (2–3) (1998) 149–161. [223] G.J. Xu, D.F. Watt, P.P. Hudec, Effectiveness of mineral admixtures in reducing ASR expansion, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (6) (1995) 1225–1236. [224] N.P. Hasparyk, P.J. Monteiro, H. Carasek, Effect of silica fume and rice husk ash on alkali-silica reaction, Mater. J. 97 (4) (2000) 486–492. [225] H.T. Le, Behaviour of Rice Husk Ash in Self-Compacting High Performance Concrete Dissertation, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, 2015. [226] R. Zerbino, G. Giaccio, O. Batic, G. Isaia, Alkali–silica reaction in mortars and concretes incorporating natural rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 796–806. [227] G.R. De Sensale, Effect of rice-husk ash on durability of cementitious materials, Cement Concr. Compos. 32 (9) (2010) 718–725. [228] R. Oberholster, W. Westra, The effectiveness of mineral admixtures in reducing expansion due to alkali-aggregate reaction with Malmesbury Group aggregates, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Alkali-aggregate reaction in concrete, Cape Town, National Building Research Institute, Pretoria, paper S, 1981. [229] A. Buck, USE of cementitious materials other than portland cement. concrete durability. Katherine and Bryant mather internationl conference, Held at Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 27 APRIL-MAY 1987, Publication of: American Concrete Institute, 1987. [230] J. Lindgård, Ö. Andiç-Çakır, I. Fernandes, T.F. Rønning, M.D. Thomas, Alkali– silica reactions (ASR): literature review on parameters influencing laboratory performance testing, Cement Concr. Res. 42 (2) (2012) 223–243. [231] _I.B. Topçu, A.R. Bog˘a, T. Bilir, Alkali–silica reactions of mortars produced by using waste glass as fine aggregate and admixtures such as fly ash and Li2 CO3, Waste Manage. 28 (5) (2008) 878–884. [232] Ö. Özkan, _I. Yüksel, Studies on mortars containing waste bottle glass and industrial by-products, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (6) (2008) 1288–1298. [233] A. Behnood, H. Ziari, Effects of silica fume addition and water to cement ratio on the properties of high-strength concrete after exposure to high temperatures, Cement Concr. Compos. 30 (2) (2008) 106–112. [234] S. Bernal, E. Rodríguez, R.M. de Gutiérrez, J. Provis, Performance at high temperature of alkali-activated slag pastes produced with silica fume and rice husk ash based activators, Materiales de Construcción 65 (318) (2015) 049. [235] A.M. Rashad, A brief on high-volume Class F fly ash as cement replacement–a guide for civil engineer, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 4 (2) (2015) 278– 306. [236] Y. Chan, X. Luo, W. Sun, Compressive strength and pore structure of high- performance concrete after exposure to high temperature up to 800 C, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (2) (2000) 247–251. [237] F.-P. Cheng, V. Kodur, T.-C. Wang, Stress-strain curves for high strength concrete at elevated temperatures, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (1) (2004) 84–90. [238] I. Janotka, T. Nürnbergerová, Effect of temperature on structural quality of the cement paste and high-strength concrete with silica fume, Nucl. Eng. Des. 235 (17) (2005) 2019–2032. [239] D.L. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, K. Sagoe-Crentsil, Comparative performance of geopolymers made with metakaolin and fly ash after exposure to elevated temperatures, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (12) (2007) 1583–1589. [240] D.L. Kong, J.G. Sanjayan, Effect of elevated temperatures on geopolymer paste, mortar and concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 40 (2) (2010) 334–339. [241] Z. Pan, Z. Tao, T. Murphy, R. Wuhrer, High temperature performance of mortars containing fine glass powders, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017). [242] C.-S. Poon, S. Azhar, M. Anson, Y.-L. Wong, Comparison of the strength and durability performance of normal-and high-strength pozzolanic concretes at elevated temperatures, Cement Concr. Res. 31 (9) (2001) 1291–1300. [243] A.M. Rashad, D.M. Sadek, H.A. Hassan, An investigation on blast-furnace stag as fine aggregate in alkali-activated slag mortars subjected to elevated temperatures, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 1086–1096. [244] H. Tanyildizi, A. Coskun, The effect of high temperature on compressive strength and splitting tensile strength of structural lightweight concrete containing fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (11) (2008) 2269–2275. [245] M.J. Terro, Properties of concrete made with recycled crushed glass at elevated temperatures, Build. Environ. 41 (5) (2006) 633–639. [246] Y. Xu, Y. Wong, C. Poon, M. Anson, Impact of high temperature on PFA concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (7) (2001) 1065–1073. [247] P. Chindaprasirt, P. Kanchanda, A. Sathonsaowaphak, H. Cao, Sulfate resistance of blended cements containing fly ash and rice husk ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (6) (2007) 1356–1361. [248] B. Chatveera, P. Lertwattanaruk, Durability of conventional concretes containing black rice husk ash, J. Environ. Manage. 92 (1) (2011) 59–66. [249] R. Khan, A. Jabbar, I. Ahmad, W. Khan, A.N. Khan, J. Mirza, Reduction in environmental problems using rice-husk ash in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 360–365. [250] D. Roy, P. Arjunan, M. Silsbee, Effect of silica fume, metakaolin, and low- calcium fly ash on chemical resistance of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (12) (2001) 1809–1813. [251] P. Chindaprasirt, S. Homwuttiwong, V. Sirivivatnanon, Influence of fly ash fineness on strength, drying shrinkage and sulfate resistance of blended cement mortar, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (7) (2004) 1087–1092. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1091
- 31. [252] K. Torii,M. Kawamura, Effects of fly ash and silica fume on the resistance of mortar to sulfuric acid and sulfate attack, Cem. Concr. Res. 24 (2) (1994) 361– 370. [253] K. Torii, K. Taniguchi, M. Kawamura, Sulfate resistance of high fly ash content concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 25 (4) (1995) 759–768. [254] C. Ouyang, A. Nanni, W.F. Chang, Internal and external sources of sulfate ions in Portland cement mortar: two types of chemical attack, Cem. Concr. Res. 18 (5) (1988) 699–709. [255] W.A. Tasong, S. Wild, R.J. Tilley, Mechanisms by which ground granulated blastfurnace slag prevents sulphate attack of lime-stabilised kaolinite, Cement Concr. Res. 29 (7) (1999) 975–982. [256] E. Rozière, A. Loukili, R. El Hachem, F. Grondin, Durability of concrete exposed to leaching and external sulphate attacks, Cem. Concr. Res. 39 (12) (2009) 1188–1198. [257] A. Skaropoulou, S. Tsivilis, G. Kakali, J. Sharp, R. Swamy, Thaumasite form of sulfate attack in limestone cement mortars: a study on long term efficiency of mineral admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (6) (2009) 2338–2345. [258] G. Osborne, Durability of Portland blast-furnace slag cement concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 21 (1) (1999) 11–21. [259] D. Higgins, Increased sulfate resistance of ggbs concrete in the presence of carbonate, Cement Concr. Compos. 25 (8) (2003) 913–919. [260] D. Higgins, N. Crammond, Resistance of concrete containing GGBS to the thaumasite form of sulfate attack, Cement Concr. Compos. 25 (8) (2003) 921– 929. [261] M. Uysal, M. Sumer, Performance of self-compacting concrete containing different mineral admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (11) (2011) 4112– 4120. [262] M. O’Connell, C. McNally, M.G. Richardson, Performance of concrete incorporating GGBS in aggressive wastewater environments, Constr. Build. Mater. 27 (1) (2012) 368–374. [263] H.-Y. Wang, A study of the effects of LCD glass sand on the properties of concrete, Waste Manage. 29 (1) (2009) 335–341. [264] A.F. Omran, D. Etienne, D. Harbec, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Long-term performance of glass-powder concrete in large-scale field applications, Constr. Build. Mater. 135 (2017) 43–58. [265] D. Harbec, A. Zidol, A. Tagnit-Hamou, F. Gitzhofer, Mechanical and durability properties of high performance glass fume concrete and mortars, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 142–156. [266] E. Ganjian, H.S. Pouya, The effect of Persian Gulf tidal zone exposure on durability of mixes containing silica fume and blast furnace slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (2) (2009) 644–652. [267] Z. Makhloufi, S. Aggoun, B. Benabed, E. Kadri, M. Bederina, Effect of magnesium sulfate on the durability of limestone mortars based on quaternary blended cements, Cement Concr. Compos. 65 (2016) 186–199. [268] M.A.E. Aziz, S.A.E. Aleem, M. Heikal, H.E. Didamony, Hydration and durability of sulphate-resisting and slag cement blends in Caron’s Lake water, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (8) (2005) 1592–1600. [269] Y. Gao, G. De Schutter, G. Ye, Z. Tan, K. Wu, The ITZ microstructure, thickness and porosity in blended cementitious composite: Effects of curing age, water to binder ratio and aggregate content, Compos. B Eng. 60 (2014) 1–13. [270] C. Lian, Y. Zhuge, Optimum mix design of enhanced permeable concrete–an experimental investigation, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (12) (2010) 2664–2671. [271] H. Yazıcı, M.Y. Yardımcı, H. Yig˘iter, S. Aydın, S. Türkel, Mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete containing high volumes of ground granulated blast furnace slag, Cement Concr. Compos. 32 (8) (2010) 639–648. [272] P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and early strength properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in ambient condition, Constr. Build. Mater. 66 (2014) 163–171. [273] D. Wang, Z. Chen, On predicting compressive strengths of mortars with ternary blends of cement, GGBFS and fly ash, Cement Concr. Res. 27 (4) (1997) 487–493. [274] H.A. Mohamed, Effect of fly ash and silica fume on compressive strength of self-compacting concrete under different curing conditions, Ain Shams Eng. J. 2 (2) (2011) 79–86. [275] P.S. Deb, P. Nath, P.K. Sarker, Drying shrinkage of slag blended fly ash geopolymer concrete cured at room temperature, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015) 594–600. [276] M. Reiner, K. Rens, High-volume fly ash concrete: analysis and application, Practice Periodical Struct. Des. Constr. 11 (1) (2006) 58–64. [277] D. Hopkins, M. Thomas, D. Oates, G. Girn, R. Munro, York University uses High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete for Green Building, Annual conference of the canadian Society for Civil Engineering, CSCE, 2001. [278] C. Griffin, Sustainability, performance and mix design of high volume fly ash concrete, 2005. web.pdx.edu/$cgriffin/research/cgriffin_HVFA.pdf. [279] A.M. Rashad, Cementitious materials and agricultural wastes as natural fine aggregate replacement in conventional mortar and concrete, Journal of Building Engineering 5 (2016) 119–141. [280] P. Mehta, High-performance, high-volume fly ash concrete for sustainable development, in: W. K. (Ed.) Proceedings of International Workshop on Sustainable development and concrete technology, Beijing, China, May 20- 21, 2004, pp. 3-14 [281] E. Yang, Y. Yang, V.C. Li, Use of high volumes of fly ash to improve ECC mechanical properties and material greenness, ACI materials journal 104 (6) (2007) 620–628. [282] R. Yu, P. Tang, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, A study of multiple effects of nano-silica and hybrid fibres on the properties of Ultra-High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) incorporating waste bottom ash (WBA), Constr. Build. Mater. 60 (2014) 98–110. [283] R. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Mix design and properties assessment of ultra- high performance fibre reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), Cement Concr. Res. 56 (2014) 29–39. [284] E. Ghafari, H. Costa, E. Júlio, Critical review on eco-efficient ultra high performance concrete enhanced with nano-materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 201–208. [285] M. Kamal, M. Safan, Z. Etman, R. Salama, Behavior and strength of beams cast with ultra high strength concrete containing different types of fibers, HBRC Journal 10 (1) (2014) 55–63. [286] K. Van Breugel, N. Van Tuan, Ultra high performance concrete made with rice husk ash for reduced autogenous shrinkage, in: Proceedings of the 4th International FIB Congress, Mumbai, India, 10-14 February 2014; Authors version, Universities Press, 2014. [287] V. Vaitkevicˇius, E. Šerelis, Influence of Silica Fume on Ultrahigh Performance Concrete, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering 8 (1) (2014) 37–42. [288] A. Tagnit-Hamou, N. Soliman, A. Omran, Green ultra-high-performance glass concrete, First interactive Symposium on UHPC 2016, 2016. [289] S. Kou, F. Xing, The effect of recycled glass powder and reject fly ash on the mechanical properties of fibre-reinforced ultrahigh performance concrete, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2012 (2012). [290] E. Ghafari, H. Costa, E. Júlio, A. Portugal, L. Durães, The effect of nanosilica addition on flowability, strength and transport properties of ultra high performance concrete, Mater. Des. 59 (2014) 1–9. [291] S. Abbas, A.M. Soliman, M.L. Nehdi, Exploring mechanical and durability properties of ultra-high performance concrete incorporating various steel fiber lengths and dosages, Constr. Build. Mater. 75 (2015) 429–441. [292] K. Arunachalam, M. Vigneshwari, Experimental investigation on ultra high strength concrete containing mineral admixtures under different curing conditions, Int. J. Civil Struct. Eng. 2 (1) (2011) 33. [293] M. Aldahdooh, N.M. Bunnori, M.M. Johari, Evaluation of ultra-high- performance-fiber reinforced concrete binder content using the response surface method, Mater. Des. 52 (2013) 957–965. [294] M. Aldahdooh, N.M. Bunnori, M.M. Johari, Influence of palm oil fuel ash on ultimate flexural and uniaxial tensile strength of green ultra-high performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites, Mater. Des. 54 (2014) 694–701. [295] R. Xiao, Z.-C. Deng, C. Shen, Properties of ultra high performance concrete containing superfine cement and without silica fume, J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 12 (2) (2014) 73–81. [296] M. Gesoglu, E. Güneyisi, A.H. Nahhab, H. Yazıcı, Properties of ultra-high performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites made with gypsum- contaminated aggregates and cured at normal and elevated temperatures, Constr. Build. Mater. 93 (2015) 427–438. [297] E. Güneyisi, M. Gesoglu, O.A. Azez, H.Ö. Öz, Effect of nano silica on the workability of self-compacting concretes having untreated and surface treated lightweight aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 115 (2016) 371–380. [298] K. Habel, M. Viviani, E. Denarié, E. Brühwiler, Development of the mechanical properties of an ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), Cem. Concr. Res. 36 (7) (2006) 1362–1370. [299] G. Habert, E. Denarié, A. Šajna, P. Rossi, Lowering the global warming impact of bridge rehabilitations by using Ultra High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concretes, Cement Concr. Compos. 38 (2013) 1–11. [300] A. Hassan, G. Mahmud, S. Jones, C. Whitford, A new test method for investigating punching shear strength in Ultra High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) slabs, Compos. Struct. 131 (2015) 832–841. [301] H. Kim, T. Koh, S. Pyo, Enhancing flowability and sustainability of ultra high performance concrete incorporating high replacement levels of industrial slags, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 153–160. [302] M.-X. Xiong, J.R. Liew, Mechanical behaviour of ultra-high strength concrete at elevated temperatures and fire resistance of ultra-high strength concrete filled steel tubes, Mater. Des. 104 (2016) 414–427. [303] G. Choe, G. Kim, N. Gucunski, S. Lee, Evaluation of the mechanical properties of 200MPa ultra-high-strength concrete at elevated temperatures and residual strength of column, Constr. Build. Mater. 86 (2015) 159–168. [304] C. Shi, D. Wang, L. Wu, Z. Wu, The hydration and microstructure of ultra high- strength concrete with cement–silica fume–slag binder, Cement Concr. Compos. 61 (2015) 44–52. [305] Z. Wu, C. Shi, K. Khayat, Influence of silica fume content on microstructure development and bond to steel fiber in ultra-high strength cement-based materials (UHSC), Cement Concr. Compos. 71 (2016) 97–109. [306] Z. Wu, C. Shi, K.H. Khayat, S. Wan, Effects of different nanomaterials on hardening and performance of ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), Cement Concr. Compos. 70 (2016) 24–34. [307] D. Wang, C. Shi, Z. Wu, L. Wu, S. Xiang, X. Pan, Effects of nanomaterials on hardening of cement–silica fume–fly ash-based ultra-high-strength concrete, Adv. Cement Res. 28 (9) (2016) 555–566. [308] A. El Mir, S.G. Nehme, K. Nehme, In situ application of high and ultra high strength concrete, Építöanyag (Online) (1) (2016) 20. [309] M.L. Romero, C. Ibañez, A. Espinos, J. Portolés, A. Hospitaler, Influence of ultra-high strength concrete on circular concrete-filled dual steel columns, Structures, Elsevier, 2016. 1092 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 32. [310] D. Yao,J. Jia, F. Wu, F. Yu, Shear performance of prestressed ultra high strength concrete encased steel beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014) 194– 201. [311] H. Yazıcı, The effect of curing conditions on compressive strength of ultra high strength concrete with high volume mineral admixtures, Build. Environ. 42 (5) (2007) 2083–2089. [312] S. Allena, C.M. Newtson, Ultra-high strength concrete mixtures using local materials, J. Civil Eng. Archit. 5 (4) (2011). [313] N.A. Libre, M. Shekarchi, M. Mahoutian, P. Soroushian, Mechanical properties of hybrid fiber reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete made with natural pumice, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (5) (2011) 2458–2464. [314] J. Choi, G. Zi, S. Hino, K. Yamaguchi, S. Kim, Influence of fiber reinforcement on strength and toughness of all-lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 69 (2014) 381–389. [315] L.A.T. Bui, C.L. Hwang, C.T. Chen, M.Y. Hsieh, Characteristics of cold-bonded lightweight aggregate produced with different mineral admixtures, Appl. Mech. Mater., Trans Tech Publ (2012) 978–983. [316] A. Sivakumar, P. Gomathi, Pelletized fly ash lightweight aggregate concrete: a promising material, J. Civil Eng. Constr. Technol. 3 (2) (2012) 42–48. [317] N. Yazdani, E. Goucher, Increasing durability of lightweight concrete through FRP wrap, Compos. B Eng. 82 (2015) 166–172. [318] O. Kayali, M. Haque, B. Zhu, Drying shrinkage of fibre-reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete containing fly ash, Cement Concr. Res. 29 (11) (1999) 1835–1840. [319] C.-L. Hwang, L.A.-T. Bui, K.-L. Lin, C.-T. Lo, Manufacture and performance of lightweight aggregate from municipal solid waste incinerator fly ash and reservoir sediment for self-consolidating lightweight concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (10) (2012) 1159–1166. [320] D.O. Oyejobi, T.S. Abdulkadir, V.M. Ajibola, Investigation of rice husk ash cementitious constituent in concrete, J. Agr. Technol. 10 (3) (2014) 533–542. [321] J. Torkaman, A. Ashori, A.S. Momtazi, Using wood fiber waste, rice husk ash, and limestone powder waste as cement replacement materials for lightweight concrete blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 50 (2014) 432–436. [322] Q. Yu, P. Spiesz, H. Brouwers, Ultra-lightweight concrete: conceptual design and performance evaluation, Cement Concr. Compos. 61 (2015) 18–28. [323] I. Ling, D. Teo, Properties of EPS RHA lightweight concrete bricks under different curing conditions, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (8) (2011) 3648–3655. [324] F. Koksal, O. Gencel, M. Kaya, Combined effect of silica fume and expanded vermiculite on properties of lightweight mortars at ambient and elevated temperatures, Constr. Build. Mater. 88 (2015) 175–187. [325] S. Erdem, X-ray computed tomography and fractal analysis for the evaluation of segregation resistance, strength response and accelerated corrosion behaviour of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 61 (2014) 10–17. [326] O. Ünal, T. Uygunog˘lu, A. Yildiz, Investigation of properties of low-strength lightweight concrete for thermal insulation, Build. Environ. 42 (2) (2007) 584–590. [327] M.I. Kaffetzakis, C.G. Papanicolaou, Bond behavior of reinforcement in Lightweight Aggregate Self-Compacting Concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 113 (2016) 641–652. [328] H. Du, S. Du, X. Liu, Effect of nano-silica on the mechanical and transport properties of lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 114–122. [329] W. Wongkeo, A. Chaipanich, Compressive strength, microstructure and thermal analysis of autoclaved and air cured structural lightweight concrete made with coal bottom ash and silica fume, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 527 (16) (2010) 3676–3684. [330] K.-S. Youm, J. Moon, J.-Y. Cho, J.J. Kim, Experimental study on strength and durability of lightweight aggregate concrete containing silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 517–527. [331] B. Kucharczyková, Z. Keršner, O. Pospíchal, P. Misák, P. Daneˇk, P. Schmid, The porous aggregate pre-soaking in relation to the freeze–thaw resistance of lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 761–766. [332] M. Shannag, Characteristics of lightweight concrete containing mineral admixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 658–662. [333] B. Arisoy, H.-C. Wu, Material characteristics of high performance lightweight concrete reinforced with PVA, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (4) (2008) 635–645. [334] M. Thomas, T. Bremner, Performance of lightweight aggregate concrete containing slag after 25 years in a harsh marine environment, Cem. Concr. Res. 42 (2) (2012) 358–364. [335] A. Al-Sibahy, R. Edwards, Mechanical and thermal properties of novel lightweight concrete mixtures containing recycled glass and metakaolin, Constr. Build. Mater. 31 (2012) 157–167. [336] S. Chidiac, S. Mihaljevic, Performance of dry cast concrete blocks containing waste glass powder or polyethylene aggregates, Cement Concr. Compos. 33 (8) (2011) 855–863. [337] P. Spiesz, S. Rouvas, H. Brouwers, Utilization of waste glass in translucent and photocatalytic concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 128 (2016) 436–448. [338] B.L.A. Tuan, C.-L. Hwang, K.-L. Lin, Y.-Y. Chen, M.-P. Young, Development of lightweight aggregate from sewage sludge and waste glass powder for concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 334–339. [339] Y.-L. Wei, C.-Y. Lin, K.-W. Ko, H.P. Wang, Preparation of low water-sorption lightweight aggregates from harbor sediment added with waste glass, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 63 (5) (2011) 135–140. [340] R. Demirbog˘a, R. Gül, Production of high strength concrete by use of industrial by-products, Build. Environ. 41 (8) (2006) 1124–1127. [341] M. Haque, O. Kayali, Properties of high-strength concrete using a fine fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 28 (10) (1998) 1445–1452. [342] C. Poon, L. Lam, Y. Wong, A study on high strength concrete prepared with large volumes of low calcium fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (3) (2000) 447–455. [343] J. Kumar, K. Ramana, Use of copper slag and fly ash in high strength concrete, Int. J. Sci. Res. 4 (10) (2014) 777–781. [344] A. Zeyad, M.M. Johari, B. Tayeh, M.O. Yusuf, Efficiency of treated and untreated palm oil fuel ash as a supplementary binder on engineering and fluid transport properties of high-strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 1066–1079. [345] P. Sharmila, G. Dhinakaran, Compressive strength, porosity and sorptivity of ultra fine slag based high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 120 (2016) 48–53. [346] M. Elchalakani, T. Aly, E. Abu-Aisheh, Sustainable concrete with high volume GGBFS to build Masdar City in the UAE, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 1 (2014) 10–24. [347] Ö. Kırca, _I.Ö. Yaman, M. Tokyay, Compressive strength development of calcium aluminate cement–GGBFS blends, Cement Concr. Compos. 35 (1) (2013) 163–170. [348] H.-B. Zhu, M.-Z. Yan, P.-M. Wang, C. Li, Y.-J. Cheng, Mechanical performance of concrete combined with a novel high strength organic fiber, Constr. Build. Mater. 78 (2015) 289–294. [349] A.R. Bagheri, H. Zanganeh, M.M. Moalemi, Mechanical and durability properties of ternary concretes containing silica fume and low reactivity blast furnace slag, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (5) (2012) 663–670. [350] D. Sharma, S. Sharma, A. Goyal, Utilization of waste foundry slag and alccofine for developing high strength concrete, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 11 (4) (2016) 3190–3205. [351] K. Amnadnua, W. Tangchirapat, C. Jaturapitakkul, Strength, water permeability, and heat evolution of high strength concrete made from the mixture of calcium carbide residue and fly ash, Mater. Des. 51 (2013) 894– 901. [352] H. Mahmud, S. Bahri, Y. Yee, Y. Yeap, Effect of rice husk ash on strength and durability of high strength high performance concrete, World Acad. Sci., Eng. Technol., Int. J. Civil, Environ., Struct., Constr. Arch. Eng. 10 (3) (2016) 375– 380. [353] J. Alex, J. Dhanalakshmi, B. Ambedkar, Experimental investigation on rice husk ash as cement replacement on concrete production, Constr. Build. Mater. 127 (2016) 353–362. [354] Sß. Erdog˘du, C. Arslantürk, Sß. Kurbetci, Influence of fly ash and silica fume on the consistency retention and compressive strength of concrete subjected to prolonged agitating, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (3) (2011) 1277–1281. [355] L. Chandra, D. Hardjito, The impact of using fly ash, silica fume and calcium carbonate on the workability and compressive strength of mortar, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015) 773–779. [356] M. Amin, K. Abu el-Hassan, Effect of using different types of nano materials on mechanical properties of high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 80 (2015) 116–124. [357] M. Khan, W. Abbass, Flexural behavior of high-strength concrete beams reinforced with a strain hardening cement-based composite layer, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 927–935. [358] F. Pelisser, N. Zavarise, T.A. Longo, A.M. Bernardin, Concrete made with recycled tire rubber: effect of alkaline activation and silica fume addition, J. Cleaner Prod. 19 (6) (2011) 757–763. [359] M. Sarıdemir, Effect of silica fume and ground pumice on compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013) 484–489. [360] M.N. Islam, M.F. Mohd Zain, M. Jamil, Prediction of strength and slump of rice husk ash incorporated high-performance concrete, J. Civil Eng. Manage. 18 (3) (2012) 310–317. [361] K. Arunachalam, R. Gopalakrishnan, Experimental Investigation on high performance fly ash Concrete in normal and aggressive environment, 29th Conference on Our World in Concrete Structures, Singapore City, 2004, pp. 181-188. [362] M. Safiuddin, J. West, K. Soudki, Hardened properties of self-consolidating high performance concrete including rice husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 32 (9) (2010) 708–717. [363] T. Ponikiewski, J. Gołaszewski, The rheological and mechanical properties of high-performance self-compacting concrete with high-calcium fly ash, Procedia Eng. 65 (2013) 33–38. [364] F.A. Sabet, N.A. Libre, M. Shekarchi, Mechanical and durability properties of self consolidating high performance concrete incorporating natural zeolite, silica fume and fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 44 (2013) 175–184. [365] A. Gonzalez-Corominas, M. Etxeberria, C.S. Poon, Influence of steam curing on the pore structures and mechanical properties of fly-ash high performance concrete prepared with recycled aggregates, Cement Concr. Compos. 71 (2016) 77–84. [366] A. Borosnyói, Long term durability performance and mechanical properties of high performance concretes with combined use of supplementary cementing materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 307–324. [367] O. Büyüköztürk, D. Lau, High Performance Concrete: Fundamentals and Application, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 2005. [368] A. Camões, P. Rocha, J. Pereira, J. Aguiar, S. Jalali, Low cost high performance concrete using low quality fly ash, in: ERMCO 98: 12th European Ready Mixed Concrete Congress, 1998, pp. 478-486. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1093
- 33. [369] P.-K. Chang,An approach to optimizing mix design for properties of high- performance concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (4) (2004) 623–629. [370] S. Chen, C.-S. Chang, H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang, Mixture design of high performance recycled liquid crystal glasses concrete (HPGC), Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (10) (2011) 3886–3892. [371] W. Ling, T. Pei, Y. Yan, Application of ground granulated blast furnace slag in high-performance concrete in China, International Workshop on Sustainable Development and Concrete Technology, Organized by China Building Materials Academy, PRC, 2004, pp. 309–317. [372] COWI, Fly ash in production of high performance concrete in Denmark., Denmark, 2009. [373] U. Avila-López, J. Almanza-Robles, J. Escalante-García, Investigation of novel waste glass and limestone binders using statistical methods, Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 296–303. [374] D. Huiskes, A. Keulen, Q. Yu, H. Brouwers, Design and performance evaluation of ultra-lightweight geopolymer concrete, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 516–526. [375] G. Maranan, A. Manalo, B. Benmokrane, W. Karunasena, P. Mendis, Evaluation of the flexural strength and serviceability of geopolymer concrete beams reinforced with glass-fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars, Eng. Struct. 101 (2015) 529–541. [376] A. Petrillo, R. Cioffi, C. Ferone, F. Colangelo, C. Borrelli, Eco-sustainable Geopolymer concrete blocks production process, Agr. Agric. Sci. Procedia 8 (2016) 408–418. [377] J. He, Y. Jie, J. Zhang, Y. Yu, G. Zhang, Synthesis and characterization of red mud and rice husk ash-based geopolymer composites, Cement Concr. Compos. 37 (2013) 108–118. [378] L. Assi, S. Ghahari, E.E. Deaver, D. Leaphart, P. Ziehl, Improvement of the early and final compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete at ambient conditions, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 806–813. [379] J. Xie, O. Kayali, Effect of superplasticiser on workability enhancement of Class F and Class C fly ash-based geopolymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 122 (2016) 36–42. [380] Z. Zhang, J.L. Provis, J. Zou, A. Reid, H. Wang, Toward an indexing approach to evaluate fly ashes for geopolymer manufacture, Cem. Concr. Res. 85 (2016) 163–173. [381] M. Torres-Carrasco, F. Puertas, Waste glass in the geopolymer preparation. Mechanical and microstructural characterisation, J. Cleaner Prod. 90 (2015) 397–408. [382] R. Martinez-Lopez, J.I. Escalante-Garcia, Alkali activated composite binders of waste silica soda lime glass and blast furnace slag: strength as a function of the composition, Constr. Build. Mater. 119 (2016) 119–129. [383] I. Kourti, A.R. Devaraj, A.G. Bustos, D. Deegan, A.R. Boccaccini, C.R. Cheeseman, Geopolymers prepared from DC plasma treated air pollution control (APC) residues glass: properties and characterisation of the binder phase, J. Hazard. Mater. 196 (2011) 86–92. [384] A.A. Aliabdo, A.E.M.A. Elmoaty, H.A. Salem, Effect of water addition, plasticizer and alkaline solution constitution on fly ash based geopolymer concrete performance, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 694–703. [385] W. Zhou, C. Yan, P. Duan, Y. Liu, Z. Zhang, X. Qiu, D. Li, A comparative study of high-and low-Al 2 O 3 fly ash based-geopolymers: The role of mix proportion factors and curing temperature, Mater. Des. 95 (2016) 63–74. [386] P. Duxson, J.L. Provis, G.C. Lukey, J.S. Van Deventer, The role of inorganic polymer technology in the development of ‘green concrete’, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (12) (2007) 1590–1597. [387] M. Šejnoha, M. Broucˇek, E. Novotná, Z. Keršner, D. Lehky´ , P. Frantı´k, Fracture properties of cement and alkali activated fly ash based concrete with application to segmental tunnel lining, Adv. Eng. Softw. 62 (2013) 61–71. [388] Q. Nie, C. Zhou, H. Li, X. Shu, H. Gong, B. Huang, Numerical simulation of fly ash concrete under sulfate attack, Constr. Build. Mater. 84 (2015) 261–268. [389] K.T. Nguyen, N. Ahn, T.A. Le, K. Lee, Theoretical and experimental study on mechanical properties and flexural strength of fly ash-geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 106 (2016) 65–77. [390] V.Z. Zadeh, C. Bobko, Nanomechanical characteristics of lightweight aggregate concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials exposed to elevated temperature, Constr. Build. Mater. 51 (2014) 198–206. [391] X. Wang, K. Park, Analysis of compressive strength development of concrete containing high volume fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 98 (2015) 810–819. [392] G. Golewski, P. Golewski, T. Sadowski, Numerical modelling crack propagation under Mode II fracture in plain concretes containing siliceous fly-ash additive using XFEM method, Comput. Mater. Sci. 62 (2012) 75–78. [393] Z.S. Metaxa, M.S. Konsta-Gdoutos, S.P. Shah, Crack Free Concrete Made With Nanofiber Reinforcement, Developing a Research Agenda for Transportation Infrastructure Preservation and Renewal Conference, 2009. [394] M. Nehdi, J. Duquette, A. El Damatty, Performance of rice husk ash produced using a new technology as a mineral admixture in concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 33 (8) (2003) 1203–1210. [395] P.C. Association, Guide specification for concrete subject to alkali-silica reactions, Portland Cement Association1994. [396] M.M. Johari, J. Brooks, S. Kabir, P. Rivard, Influence of supplementary cementitious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (5) (2011) 2639–2648. [397] J.G. Jawahar, C. Sashidhar, I.R. Reddy, J.A. Peter, Design of cost-effective M 25 grade of self compacting concrete, Mater. Des. 49 (2013) 687–692. [398] S.H. Ahmad, S.P. Shah, Structural properties of high strength concrete and its implications for precast prestressed concrete, PCI Journal 30 (6) (1985) 92– 119. [399] N. Bester, Structural Concrete Properties and Practice. [400] A. Baldwin, C.-S. Poon, L.-Y. Shen, S. Austin, I. Wong, Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and traditional construction, Renewable Energy 34 (9) (2009) 2067–2073. [401] N. Soliman, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Partial substitution of silica fume with fine glass powder in UHPC: Filling the micro gap, Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017) 374–383. [402] N.A. Soliman, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Using glass sand as an alternative for quartz sand in UHPC, Constr. Build. Mater. 145 (2017) 243–252. [403] A.H.A. Jamil, M.S. Fathi, The integration of lean construction and sustainable construction: a stakeholder perspective in analyzing sustainable lean construction strategies in Malaysia, Procedia Computer Science 100 (2016) 634–643. [404] Y. Ballim, P.C. Graham, The effects of supplementary cementing materials in modifying the heat of hydration of concrete, Mater. Struct. 42 (6) (2009) 803– 811. [405] H. Toutanji, N. Delatte, S. Aggoun, R. Duval, A. Danson, Effect of supplementary cementitious materials on the compressive strength and durability of short-term cured concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (2) (2004) 311– 319. [406] W. Fajun, M.W. Grutzeck, D.M. Roy, The retarding effects of fly ash upon the hydration of cement pastes: the first 24 hours, Cem. Concr. Res. 15 (1) (1985) 174–184. [407] S. Antiohos, J. Tapali, M. Zervaki, J. Sousa-Coutinho, S. Tsimas, V. Papadakis, Low embodied energy cement containing untreated RHA: a strength development and durability study, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013) 455–463. [408] T.-C. Ling, C.S. Poon, Spent fluorescent lamp glass as a substitute for fine aggregate in cement mortar, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017). [409] J.-X. Lu, Z.-H. Duan, C.S. Poon, Fresh properties of cement pastes or mortars incorporating waste glass powder and cullet, Constr. Build. Mater. 131 (2017) 793–799. [410] P. Walczak, J. Małolepszy, M. Reben, P. Szyman´ ski, K. Rzepa, Utilization of waste glass in autoclaved aerated concrete, Procedia Eng. 122 (2015) 302– 309. [411] I.B. Topcu, M. Canbaz, Properties of concrete containing waste glass, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (2) (2004) 267–274. [412] Y. Shao, T. Lefort, S. Moras, D. Rodriguez, Studies on concrete containing ground waste glass, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (1) (2000) 91–100. [413] A. Shayan, A. Xu, Value-added utilisation of waste glass in concrete, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (1) (2004) 81–89. [414] G. Lee, C.S. Poon, Y.L. Wong, T.C. Ling, Effects of recycled fine glass aggregates on the properties of dry–mixed concrete blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 38 (2013) 638–643. [415] A. Omran, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Performance of glass-powder concrete in field applications, Constr. Build. Mater. 109 (2016) 84–95. [416] F.N. Okoye, S. Prakash, N.B. Singh, Durability of fly ash based geopolymer concrete in the presence of silica fume, J. Cleaner Prod. 149 (2017) 1062– 1067. [417] R. van Gijlswijk, S. Pascale, S. de Vos, G. Urbano, V.I.S.N. alla Dogana, Carbon footprint of concrete based on secondary materials, HERON 60 (1/2) (2015) 113. [418] X. Cao, X. Li, Y. Zhu, Z. Zhang, A comparative study of environmental performance between prefabricated and traditional residential buildings in China, J. Cleaner Prod. 109 (2015) 131–143. [419] I. Topcu, High-volume ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) concrete, Eco-Efficient Concrete (2013) 218–240. [420] C. Meyer, N. Egosi, C. Andela, Concrete with waste glass as aggregate, in: Proceedings of the international symposium concrete technology unit of ASCE and University of Dundee, Dundee, 2001, pp. 179–87. [421] M. Alkaysi, S. El-Tawil, Z. Liu, W. Hansen, Effects of silica powder and cement type on durability of ultra high performance concrete (UHPC), Cement Concr. Compos. 66 (2016) 47–56. [422] A. Lampropoulos, S.A. Paschalis, O. Tsioulou, S.E. Dritsos, Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using ultra high performance fibre reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), Eng. Struct. 106 (2016) 370–384. [423] P. Posi, P. Thongjapo, N. Thamultree, P. Boontee, P. Kasemsiri, P. Chindaprasirt, Pressed lightweight fly ash-OPC geopolymer concrete containing recycled lightweight concrete aggregate, Constr. Build. Mater. 127 (2016) 450–456. [424] F. D’Alessandro, F. Asdrubali, G. Baldinelli, Multi-parametric characterization of a sustainable lightweight concrete containing polymers derived from electric wires, Constr. Build. Mater. 68 (2014) 277–284. [425] A.P. Fantilli, A.D. Cavallo, G. Pistone, Fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete slabs for the maintenance of the Soleri Viaduct, Eng. Struct. 99 (2015) 184– 191. [426] S. Ghasemi, P. Zohrevand, A. Mirmiran, Y. Xiao, K. Mackie, A super lightweight UHPC–HSS deck panel for movable bridges, Eng. Struct. 113 (2016) 186–193. [427] L. Yun-Ming, H. Cheng-Yong, M.M. Al Bakri, K. Hussin, Structure and properties of clay-based geopolymer cements: A, Prog. Mater Sci. 83 (2016) 595–629. [428] R.A.A.B. Santa, C. Soares, H.G. Riella, Geopolymers with a high percentage of bottom ash for solidification/immobilization of different toxic metals, J. Hazard. Mater. 318 (2016) 145–153. [429] G. Maranan, A. Manalo, B. Benmokrane, W. Karunasena, P. Mendis, Behavior of concentrically loaded geopolymer-concrete circular columns reinforced 1094 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
- 34. longitudinally and transverselywith GFRP bars, Eng. Struct. 117 (2016) 422– 436. [430] A.M. Aguirre-Guerrero, R.A. Robayo-Salazar, R.M. de Gutiérrez, A novel geopolymer application: Coatings to protect reinforced concrete against corrosion, Appl. Clay Sci. (2016). [431] E. Gartner, Industrially interesting approaches to ‘‘low-CO2” cements, Cement Concr. Res. 34 (9) (2004) 1489–1498. [432] A.R. Sakulich, Reinforced geopolymer composites for enhanced material greenness and durability, Sustainable Cities Soc. 1 (4) (2011) 195–210. [433] R.K. Sandhu, R. Siddique, Influence of rice husk ash (RHA) on the properties of self-compacting concrete: A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 153 (2017) 751– 764. [434] D.M. Roy, Alkali-activated cements opportunities and challenges, Cem. Concr. Res. 29 (2) (1999) 249–254. [435] M. Zhang, R. Lastra, V. Malhotra, Rice-husk ash paste and concrete: some aspects of hydration and the microstructure of the interfacial zone between the aggregate and paste, Cement Concr. Res. 26 (6) (1996) 963–977. [436] H. Chao-Lung, B. Le Anh-Tuan, C. Chun-Tsun, Effect of rice husk ash on the strength and durability characteristics of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (9) (2011) 3768–3772. [437] H.B. Mahmud, M.F.A. Malik, R.A. Kahar, M.F.M. Zain, S.N. Raman, Mechanical properties and durability of normal and water reduced high strength grade 60 concrete containing rice husk ash, J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 7 (1) (2009) 21– 30. [438] G.R. de Sensale, Strength development of concrete with rice-husk ash, Cement Concr. Compos. 28 (2) (2006) 158–160. [439] G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, E.d.M.R. Fairbairn, Use of ultrafine rice husk ash with high-carbon content as pozzolan in high performance concrete, Mater. Struct. 42 (7) (2009) 983–992. [440] R. Yu, Q. Song, X. Wang, Z. Zhang, Z. Shui, H. Brouwers, Sustainable development of Ultra-High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC): towards to an optimized concrete matrix and efficient fibre application, J. Cleaner Prod. (2017). [441] M. Radlinski, J. Olek, Investigation into the synergistic effects in ternary cementitious systems containing portland cement, fly ash and silica fume, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (4) (2012) 451–459. [442] W. Qiang, W. Dengquan, C. Honghui, The role of fly ash microsphere in the microstructure and macroscopic properties of high-strength concrete, Cement Concr. Compos. (2017). [443] F.U. Shaikh, S.W. Supit, Compressive strength and durability properties of high volume fly ash (HVFA) concretes containing ultrafine fly ash (UFFA), Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 192–205. [444] D. Shen, X. Shi, S. Zhu, X. Duan, J. Zhang, Relationship between tensile Young’s modulus and strength of fly ash high strength concrete at early age, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 317–326. [445] A. Mehta, R. Siddique, B.P. Singh, S. Aggoun, G. Łagód, D. Barnat-Hunek, Influence of various parameters on strength and absorption properties of fly ash based geopolymer concrete designed by Taguchi method, Constr. Build. Mater. 150 (2017) 817–824. [446] N.C. Thang, N. TUAN, L. THANH, P. HANH, Y. GUANG, Ultra High Performance Concrete using a combination of Silica Fume and Ground Granulated Blast- Furnace Slag in Vietnam, in: The international Conference on Sustainable Built Environment for Now and the Future, 2013, pp. 26–27. [447] A. Dehghan, K. Peterson, A. Shvarzman, Recycled glass fiber reinforced polymer additions to Portland cement concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 146 (2017) 238–250. [448] M. Gesoglu, E. Güneyisi, G.F. Muhyaddin, D.S. Asaad, Strain hardening ultra- high performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites: effect of fiber type and concentration, Compos. B Eng. 103 (2016) 74–83. [449] W. Kushartomo, I. Bali, B. Sulaiman, Mechanical behavior of reactive powder concrete with glass powder substitute, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015) 617–622. [450] R. Harbi, R. Derabla, Z. Nafa, Improvement of the properties of a mortar with 5% of kaolin fillers in sand combined with metakaolin, brick waste and glass powder in cement, Constr. Build. Mater. 152 (2017) 632–641. K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1095 View publication statsView publication stats