Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cigos 2021
Cigos 2021
Cuong Ha-Minh · Anh Minh Tang ·
Tinh Quoc Bui · Xuan Hong Vu ·
Dat Vu Khoa Huynh Editors
The International
Conference Series
on Geotechnics, Civil
Engineering and
Structures (CIGOS)
Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on Geotechnics, Civil
Engineering and Structures
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering
Volume 203
Series Editors
Marco di Prisco, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
Sheng-Hong Chen, School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering,
Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Ioannis Vayas, Institute of Steel Structures, National Technical University of
Athens, Athens, Greece
Sanjay Kumar Shukla, School of Engineering, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup,
WA, Australia
Anuj Sharma, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA
Nagesh Kumar, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science
Bangalore, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Chien Ming Wang, School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering (LNCE) publishes the latest developments in
Civil Engineering—quickly, informally and in top quality. Though original
research reported in proceedings and post-proceedings represents the core of
LNCE, edited volumes of exceptionally high quality and interest may also be
considered for publication. Volumes published in LNCE embrace all aspects and
subfields of, as well as new challenges in, Civil Engineering. Topics in the series
include:
• Construction and Structural Mechanics
• Building Materials
• Concrete, Steel and Timber Structures
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Earthquake Engineering
• Coastal Engineering
• Ocean and Offshore Engineering; Ships and Floating Structures
• Hydraulics, Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering
• Environmental Engineering and Sustainability
• Structural Health and Monitoring
• Surveying and Geographical Information Systems
• Indoor Environments
• Transportation and Traffic
• Risk Analysis
• Safety and Security
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Contents
Keynote
Flexible Blades Wind-Turbines: Giant Installations
and System-of-Systems Approach to Optimizing Wind-Energy
Farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Adnan Ibrahimbegovic
Innovation in Cements—Can We Meet Future Construction
Needs Sustainably? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
John L. Provis
Urban Thermal Modulation—The Limits of Interiorization
and Emergence of Atmospheric Security? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Simon Marvin
xv
xvi Contents
1 Introduction
The demand of concrete material for the construction sector increases year after
year. The depletion of natural resources and the CO2 emissions due to the concrete
fabrication are important problems which need to be paid attention for a sustainable
development. To reduce the exploitation of natural aggregates, the recycling is a
strategy which is usually recommended. For the CO2 emission, seeking alternative
binders having less carbon footprint than cement is one of the ways to be explored. A
possibility is using industrial by-products (e.g. fly ash—FA, slag) to replace partially
or totally the cement in concrete. A total replacement of cement is feasible with
geopolymer, which uses alkaline activators such as NaOH, KOH or Mg(OH)2 to
H.-B. Le
Mien Tay Construction University, Vinh Long City, Vietnam
e-mail: lehoaibao@mtu.edu.vn
H.-B. Le · Q.-B. Bui (B)
Sustainable Developments in Civil Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Civil Engineering,
Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
e-mail: buiquocbao@tdtu.edu.vn
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 793
C. Ha-Minh et al., (eds.), CIGOS 2021, Emerging Technologies and Applications
for Green Infrastructure, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 203,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7160-9_80
794 H.-B. Le and Q.-B. Bui
react with materials containing Silica and Alumina to produce binders [1]. On the
other hand, recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) can be used to partially or fully
replace natural aggregates [2]. However, the number of studies on recycled aggre-
gate geopolymer concrete (GRAC) is still limited. The models for the compressive
strength prediction of GRAC, to our knowledge, have not yet been available. In the
present study, first, different parameters for the optimization of GRAC were experi-
mentally investigated. Then, an empirical formula was proposed and the identification
of the parameters for the models was conducted.
2 Experiments
Fly Ash: FA in the present study was collected from the DH3 Coal Power Plant,
Vietnam. The analyses by scanning electron microscope (SEM) showed that the FA
used has spherical forms; the chemical composition was determined following Amer-
ican Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM 618) procedure. The result is presented
in Table 1, which corresponds to a Class-F FA following ASTM classification.
Aggregates: The RCA was obtained by crushing an old concrete. The natural coarse
aggregate (NCA) used for OPC were used to produce the geopolymer concrete
(GPC). The fine aggregate was a natural river sand. Different tests have been
performed to determine the specific gravity, the dry density, the saturated density, the
water absorption and the Aggregate Crushing Value (ACV) of RCA (Table 2). There
was a decrease in the specific gravity and dry density of RCA when compared to the
NCA. This result is because the RCA are usually bonded with old pastes which are
more porous than NCA, these old pastes cause a lower dry density and a higher water
absorption of RAC when compared to NCA. The compressive strength of aggregates
was deduced from the ACV by empirical relationships [3]; in this case, the corre-
sponding compressive strengths determined were of 70 and 34 MPa for NCA and
RCA, respectively.
Alkali-Activated Solution (AAS): To activate FA, the combination of NaOH and
Na2 SiO3 was selected as AAS. NaOH 12M solution is prepared by adding dry flakes
to water to achieve the required molar concentration.
The Na2 SiO3 /NaOH ratio for GRAC was 2.5 which was a current recommended
value for GPC [4]. Previous studies showed that when the AAS/FA ratio increased,
the workability increased but the compressive strength decreased, the recommended
values of AAS/FA for GPC with NCA ranged from 0.4 to 0.45 (by mass) [5]. Since
RCA has higher water absorption than NCA, to maintain the same workability as
GPC with NCA, the AAS/FA ratio was tested at 0.4, 0.45, and 0.5 in this study.
First, the fine and the coarse aggregates were mixed, then FA was added and mixed.
Next, AAS were progressively poured and mixed. After the mixing, the concrete
specimens were casted in 15 × 15 × 15 cm3 cube molds and compacted on a
vibrating table. A parameter which was investigated in this study was the curing
temperature. Studies reported in the literature showed that GPC could be cured under
ambient conditions, but a higher curing temperature could support chemical reac-
tions in geopolymer, which improved the compressive strength; however, the heating
increased also the energy consumption. Two types of curing were investigated: the
specimens cured under laboratory ambient conditions (27 °C and 60% RH); or cured
at 60 °C for 24 h. All specimens were stored in a controlled room (27 °C and 60%
RH) until the testing ages (3, 7, 14, and 28 days).
tested at 3, 7, 14, and 28 days. For each experimental result, three specimens were
tested; the mean values are illustrated in Fig. 1.
The influence of the heating curing is clearly observed: the compressive strength
of specimens cured with heat increases 10–12% compared to that cured at ambient.
The 28-days compressive strength was of 55 MPa and 49 MPa for specimens cured
at ambient and at 60 °C, respectively.
3 Results
3.1 Workability
The slump test—a simple and current method for the workability assessment of
ordinary concrete—is also applied for GPC [4]. The results are shown in Fig. 2
which indicates that the slump values reduced when the AAS/FA ratio decreased.
This result is not surprising because with a higher AAS/FA ratio, the quantity of
AAS (liquid) increases, which increases the workability. For the case with RCA, the
mean slump values were of 16, 18, and 20 cm for AAS/FA of 0.4, 0.45, and 0.5,
respectively. For NCA, the slump increased to values from 18 to 21 cm; with the
same AAS/FA ratio, the slumps with NCA increased about 2 cm compared to RCA.
The reason is that RCA has higher water absorption which decreases the workability
of the mixture.
Predicting the Compressive Strength of Geopolymer … 797
The compressive strengths of GRAC and NCA GPC were determined at the ages of
3, 7, 14, and 28 days. The results obtained were the mean values of three specimens
tested and illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4. It is observed that when compared to NCA GPC,
GRAC had lower compressive strength (about 30%) for all AAS/FA ratios tested.
This result is expected due to lower mechanical characteristics of RCA compared to
NCA as shown in the previous section.
For both, the curves show a general evolution of the compressive strength as a func-
tion of time. For specimens cured under ambient conditions (Fig. 3), the compressive
strength development at the early age 3 days is similar to that of ordinary cement
concretes: the 3-days compressive strength is about 50% of 28-days compressive
strength. For specimens cured under 60 °C for 24 h (Fig. 4), a quicker increase in
compressive strength at early age is observed: the compressive strength at 3 days is
about 60% of that at 28 days. This result shows influences of the thermal curing on
the early age strength development. The difference of the results obtained with three
AAS/FA ratios tested is clear for NCA GPC while the difference for GRAC was less
than 6% for all cases. Among the three AAS/FA ratios tested, the best ratio should be
AAS/FA = 0.4 because this ratio provides almost the highest compressive strength,
and this ratio is the most economical when the use of AAS is lowest.
For the case of AAS/FA = 0.4, the compressive strength at 28 days obtained on
ambient curing GRAC specimens was about 30–31 MPa (Fig. 3), while it was about
34–35 MPa for GRAC specimens cured under 60 °C during 24 h (Fig. 4). This result
is equivalent to an increase of 10% of compressive strength thanks to 24 h-heating
curing.
798 H.-B. Le and Q.-B. Bui
Numerous models exist in the literature which propose the empirical formulas to
predict the compressive strength of ordinary cement concrete. Among these models,
Predicting the Compressive Strength of Geopolymer … 799
Feret’s model is one of the most well-known thanks to its robustness [6]. For
GPC where cement is replaced by geopolymer binder (NaOH + Na2 SiO3 + FA),
the classical Feret’s model is modified by introducing a parameter B (binder), as
following:
1
f c (t) = K g f cm (t) 2 (1)
ρb W +ρw Va
1+ ρw B
where
• f c (t) is the compressive strength of GPC at a time t.
• K g is an aggregate constant which depends to the aggregates’ quality. For natural
aggregates: 4.5 ≤ K g ≤ 5.5; for RCA with a lower quality than NCA, K g < 4.5.
• f cm (t) is the compressive strength of geopolymer matrix at time t; the compressive
strength of geopolymer paste is used (Sect. 2.1).
• V a is the air volume which is 1–3% for current concretes [7], 3.29% for GPC [8].
For the present study, V a of 3% was adopted.
• ρw is the specific density of water which is 1 t/m3 . ρb is the specific density of
geopolymer, a value of 2.6 t/m3 [9] was adopted.
• W is the mass of water in concrete; W was determined from the waters existing
in NaOH and Na2 SiO3 solution, corresponding to 107.5 kg of water in 1 m3 of
concrete.
• B is the mass of geopolymer binder: B should be the sum of the masses of the
solid parts in geopolymer (called G) in 1 m3 of concrete. However, for GPC, as
shown in the previous sections, there were still numerous FA particles which did
not participate in the geopolymerization reactions, so a coefficient k b (varying
from 0 to 1) was introduced. In this case, B is replaced by k b G.
The results obtained from the proposed model for compressive strength of GRAC
at 28 days are illustrated in Fig. 5. For the case of ambient curing, the experimental
(a) (b)
Fig. 5 Numerical results of GRAC compressive strength at 28 days, for ambient curing (a) and
curing with heating (b). The thick horizontal lines represent the experimental values
800 H.-B. Le and Q.-B. Bui
(a) (b)
Fig. 6 a SRSS of GRAC compressive strengths with k b = 0.6. b Experimental and numerical
results with K g = 3.0 and k b = 0.6
compressive strength of GRAC was of 29–31 MPa; from Fig. 5a, the value identified
of K g should be in an interval ranging from 2.8 to 4.7 with the corresponding values
of kb from 0.4 to 0.6. For the case of curing at 60 °C (Fig. 5b), the experimental
compressive strength of GPC was of 30–35 MPa; from this figure, the value identified
of K g should be in the interval ranging from 2.6 to 4.7 with the corresponding values
of k b from 0.4 to 0.6. By taking into account the quality of the RCA used (lower
than NCA), the values of K g identified (from 2.6 to 4.7), which are lower than the
current cases of NCA, were reasonable. The values of K g and k b were identified
by applying the model for the compressive strength of GRAC at other ages (3, 7
and 14 days). The SRSS (square root of the sum of the squares) of the differences
between the numerical and experimental results were calculated for each case of K g
and k b . Figure 6a illustrates the variation of SRSS of GRAC compressive strengths
(at 3, 7, 14, and 28 days) in a function of K g , for the cases of k b = 0.6; from this
figure, the best value should be K g = 3.0 which provides the lowest values of SRSS
for both cases of curing. Figure 6b presents the result obtained for the case K g = 3.0,
k b = 0.6.
To verify the robustness of the model proposed and the parameters identified, the
above parameters were applied for NCA GPC. The binder coefficient k b was taken
as the same as the value identified previously (= 0.6); only the aggregate coefficient
K g varied. The best value of K g was also identified by the SRSS approach, from
which a value of K g = 4.4 was identified (the details are not presented here due to
the limited space). The comparison between the experimental and numerical results
is presented in Fig. 7. The value of K g identified (= 4.4) is rational for NCA because
as mentioned above, the current values of K g for NCA of ordinary concretes are from
4.5 to 5.5. Figure 7 shows the relevancy of the model proposed for the case of NCA
GPC.
Predicting the Compressive Strength of Geopolymer … 801
The results obtained showed that RCA had inferior quality compared to that of NCA.
This difference leads to a lower compressive strength of GRAC compared to NCA
GPC. The increase of the ASS/FA ratio from 0.4 to 0.5 increased the slump about
10% but reduced the compressive strength of the GPC about 9%. GPC cured at
60 °C for 24 h achieved higher compressive strength than cured at ambient: 15%
higher at 3 days and 9% higher at 28 days, respectively. The results also show
that the compressive strength of GRAC was limited by the compressive strength of
RCA. However, the GRAC obtained was equivalent to a C20/25 concrete following
Eurocode 2, which showed the applicability of GRAC in practice. An empirical
model was proposed. The parameters K g and k b have been identified for GPC, both
with RCA or NCA. The results showed that the model proposed could reproduce
the experimental results with acceptable accuracy. This model will be useful for the
mix design of GPC. More data in further studies will be interesting to verify the
robustness of the model.
References
1. Davidovits, J.: Global warming impact on the cement and aggregates industries. World Resour.
Rev. 6, 263–278 (1994).
2. Le, H.B., Bui, Q.B.: Recycled aggregate concretes–a state-of-the-art from the microstructure to
the structural performance, Constr. Build. Mater 257, 119522 (2020).
3. Vietnamese Standard Publication. Aggregates for Concrete and Mortar–Specifications; TCVN
7570:2006; Ministry of Science and Technology: Ha Noi, Vietnam (2006).
4. Hardjito, D., Rangan, B.V.: Development and Properties of Low Calcium Fly Ash Based
Geopolymer Concrete; Research Report GC1. Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of
Technology, Australia (2005).
802 H.-B. Le and Q.-B. Bui
5. Rangan, B.V.: Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete, Research Report GC4; Engineering
Faculty, Curtin University of Technology: Perth, Australia (2008).
6. Larrard, D.F., Colina, H.: Concrete Recycling, Research and Practice. Taylor & Francis Group:
Oxfordshire, UK (2019)
7. Gagné, R.: Air entraining agents. In Science and Technology of Concrete Admixtures. Woodhead
Publishing: Cambridge, UK 379–391 (2016).
8. Ferdous, M.W., Kayali, O., Khennane, A.: A detailed procedure of mix design for fly ash based
geopolymer concrete. In Proceedings of the Fourth Asia-Pacific Conference on FRP in Structures
(APFIS 2013), Melbourne, Australia, 11–13 December (2013).
9. Palankar, N., Shankar, A.R., Mithun, B.: Studies on eco-friendly concrete incorporating
industrial waste as aggregates. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 4, 378–390 (2015).