See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285871755

Carbonation Curing of Concrete Blocks to Mitigate Carbon Emission

Conference Paper · April 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 204

1 author:

Hilal El-Hassan
United Arab Emirates University
49 PUBLICATIONS   259 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Alkali-activated inorganic polymer concrete (AIPC) incorporating dune sand View project

Characterization of ultrafiltration membranes used as pre-treatment for desalination View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hilal El-Hassan on 02 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Carbonation Curing of Concrete Blocks to
Mitigate Carbon Emission

Hilal El-Hassan, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering
American University in Dubai

Yixin Shao, Ph.D., P.Eng

Associate Professor of Civil Engineering
McGill University

April 2015
1
Introduction
• Concrete Masonry Units (CMU) in
construction
o Non load-bearing partitioning walls
o Load-bearing walls
• Present annual consumption of 4.3
billion blocks in US & Canada
o 11.8% increase by 2014
• Steam as current CMU curing method
o Energy consumption
 0.59 GJ/m3 for atmospheric steam
 0.71 GJ/m3 for pressurized autoclaving
• The concept of carbonation
o Reduction in energy consumption
o Permanent carbon dioxide sequestration
o Reduction in CO2 emission
o Comparable mechanical properties
2
Carbonation For Emission Reduction
• Carbonation of concrete masonry units
o Reduction of service shrinkage due to carbonation
• 43% for masonry units within 24 hours
o Mass of block = 18 kg
o Cement content (10% of total mass) = 1.8 kg
o Carbon uptake (10% of cement mass) = 0.18 kg
• Steinour formula for carbonation efficiency
o CO2(%) = 0.785(CaO – 0.7SO3) + 1.091MgO + 1.42Na2O + 0.935K2O
o Portland cement has a chemical composition of 63% CaO
o Maximum CO2 uptake is on the order of 50%
• Research Objectives
o To develop a process method to maximize carbon uptake within a 24-hour
industrially acceptable timeframe
o Optimize carbon uptake and compressive strength
o Investigate the microstructure changes using SEM, XRD, and TG/DTG

3
From Source to Sink – Cradle to Crate

CO2

Cement
Cement
Production Plant

CO2 Sequestration

CO2 Truck

Concrete Block Carbonation 4

Carbonation Reaction
• Early carbonation reactions:
o Fresh concrete carbonation:
• Ca3SiO5+1.2CO2+1.2H2O  1.8CaOSiO20.6H2O+ 1.2CaCO3+
0.6H2O
• Ca2SiO4+CO2+2H2O  CaOSiO2H2O+CaCO3+ H2O
o Hydrated concrete carbonation:
• Ca(OH)2+CO2+ H2O CaCO3+ 2H2O
• 3CaO2SiO23H2O + 3CO2 3CaCO3 + 2SiO23H2O

5
Concrete Sample Preparation
• Hollow concrete masonry unit • Rectangular slab sample
o Size: 200 x 200 x 400 mm o Size: 127 x 76 x 38 mm
o Web thickness: 25 to 33 mm

• Mixture proportions:
Slab CMU Mass Percent
(g) (g) (kg/m3) (%)
Ordinary Portland Cement 88 1967 241 13
Water 35 787 96 5 w/cm = 0.4
SSD Expanded Slag 554 12251 1502 82
Concrete Sample 677 15004 1839 100
6

Curing Procedures
• Procedures
1. Steam reference
2. Hydrated reference
3. Carbonation
4. Carbonation with water compensation

Initial curing Steam curing Carbonation curing

RH T t RH T t t Water
Procedure (%) (°C) (hours) (%) (°C) (hours) (hours) Spray (g)
1 - Steam 80±5 22±1.0 0 to 8 95±5 75±5 4 - -
2 - Hydration 50±1 25±0.2 0 to 18 - - - - -
3 - Carbonation 50±1 25±0.2 0 to 18 - - - 4 to 96 -
4 - Carbonation w/ spray 50±1 25±0.2 18 - - - 4 29

7
Carbonation Process

8
 Carbon Uptake Estimation
• Mass gain 200
Mf  Mi Concrete
– CO2 uptake = 180
Mcement Styrofoam

• Mass curve 160

M1 M 2
– CO2 uptake = 140
Mcement
120
• Thermal analysis

Mass (g)
M 470 C  M 950 C 100 M1
– CO2 uptake =
Mcement 80

60
CO2 Uptake (% Cement Mass)
Average 40
Mass Thermal due to
Condition Mass Gain Curve analysis carbonation 20
M2 (Residual CO2 in chamber)
0a - - 0.0 0.0 0
0a + 4c 7.5 ± 1.8 9.0 9.1 8.5 0 60 120 180 240
Time (Minutes)
4a + 4c 21.3 ± 1.4 22.1 21.8 21.7
6a + 4c 22.8 ± 1.8 23.6 23.3 23.2
8a + 4c 23.5 ± 1.6 24.0 23.6 23.7
18a + 4c 24.2 ± 0.4 24.4 25.3 24.6
18a + 2c 20.4 ± 0.4 21.7 22.0 21.4
18a + 96c 34.9 ± 1.6 35.2 35.3 35.1
9
Mass Curve (4-hour carbonation)
60% 74% 88% 98%
30
18a+4c 8a+4c 6a+4c 4a+4c 0a+4c

25 24.36
23.98
23.61
% CO2 Uptake (%)

20 22.11

15

10
8.99

0
0 60 120 180 240 300
Carbonation Time (minutes)
10
Compressive Strength (4-hour)

11
Compressive Strength (1-day)

12
Compressive Strength (28-day)

13
Compressive Strength (with spray)

After 1 Day After 28

Batch (MPa) Days (MPa)
0a + 4c 8.6 ± 0.7 15.1 ± 1.5
0a + 4c + sp 10.0 ± 0.7 15.9 ± 1.7
0a 8.8 ± 1.0 18.2 ± 1.3
4a + 4c 7.9 ± 0.6 15.5 ± 1.6
4a + 4c + sp 8.1 ± 0.6 15.8 ± 1.3
4a 4.4 ± 0.3 13.2 ± 1.4
18a + 4c 9.9 ± 0.6 15.3 ± 1.2
18a + 4c + sp 10.5 ± 1.2 17.9 ± 1.4
18a 5.2 ± 0.5 14.4 ± 1.2
14
X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) after 1 day

15
X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) after 28 days

16
Thermogravimetry (TG/DTG) 1-day

17
Thermogravimetry (TG/DTG) 28-day

18
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

Hydrated Reference – 0a 4-hour Fresh Carbonated – 0a + 4c

4-hour Air-Cured Carbonated – 18a + 4c 4-hour Water Sprayed Carbonated – 18a + 4c +19sp
Contributions
• Carbonation falls in the same category of ongoing efforts aimed at
alleviating anthropogenic emissions
• Permanent carbon sequestration and storage in the form of
thermodynamically stable calcium carbonate
• Improve early compressive strength by three times in comparison to
hydrated reference
• North American cement industry produces 100 million tons of cement
• Estimated 80 million tons of CO2 emitted in cement production
• Concrete block carbonation could reduce emission
• One 200-mm (8”) block weighs 18 kg
• Cement content per block is 1.8 kg (10%)
• Carbon uptake (25% of cement mass) = 0.45 kg per block
• 4.3 billion blocks can sequester 2.0 million tons of CO2 per year
• CO2 emission reduction can reach 2.5% for North American cement industry
• Other research performed on carbonation of concrete pipes, pavement and
hollow-core slabs would further reduce this CO2 emission

20
View publication stats

Works Cited
1. El-Hassan, H., Shao, Y., and Ghouleh, Z. (2013). “Effect of Initial Curing on
Carbonation of Lightweight Concrete Masonry Units”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol.
110, No. 4, July-August 2013, pp. 441-450.
2. El-Hassan, H., Shao, Y., and Ghouleh, Z. (2013). “Reaction Products in Carbonation
Cured Lightweight Concrete”, ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol.
25, No. 6, June 2013, pp. 799-809.
3. Freedonia Group (2010). “Brick and Block Demand to Reach 12.4 Billion Units, $8
Billion by 201a4,” Journal of Concrete Products, Freedonia Group Study, Issue
2652.
4. Johnson, D. C. (2000). “Accelerated Carbonation of Waste Calcium Silicate
Materials,” Society of Chemical Industry, London, UK.
5. Goodbrake, C. J. (1979). “Reaction of Beta-Dicalcium Silicate and Tricalcium
Silicate with Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapor,” Journal of the American Ceramic
Society, V. 62, No. 3-4, pp. 168-171.
6. Ramachandran, V. S. and Beaudoin, J. J. (2001). "Handbook of Analytical
Techniques in 487 Concrete Science and Technology." William Andre
Publishing/Noyes.
7. ASTM (2004). "Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Concrete Masonry
Units and Related Units." ASTM International C140.
8. Steinour, H. (1956). "Some Effects of Carbon Dioxide on Mortar and Concrete."
American Concrete Institute Journal 30: 905-907.
21