Publication:
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) analysis to determine the performance of 3D printed cement mortars and geopolymers

Thumbnail Image
Files

Files

LifeCycleAssessment_nv_articulo_18077.pdf (3.63 MB)
View Statistics
Reference Managers
Mendeley
Indexers
Google Scholar CORE
QR Code
QR Code
Authors

Authors

Yoris Nobile, Adrian
Lizasoain Artega, Esther
Selbi Acevedo, Carlos
Blanco Fernández, Elena
Alonso Cañón, Sara
Indacoechea Vega, Irune
Castro Fresno, Daniel
Abstract (English)
A comparison between low-clinker cement and geopolymer mortars for their application in 3D printing is discussed in this paper. The mortars are composed of materials with low environmental impact, such as cements with low clinker content, by-products of the industry and recycled aggregates. The developed mortars were both mechanically and rheologically characterised. The environmental impact was studied by LCA. To select the most suitable dosages, MCDM analysis was applied based on cost of materials, printability and LCA. Compressive strength was considered as a normalising parameter for both the LCA and cost. The mortars showed good printability and suitable mechanical strength, being higher in the cement mortars. The LCA showed that the geopolymer mortars have a higher environmental impact due to the use of sodium hydroxide. Likewise, MCDM revealed that low-clinker cement mortars are at the top of the ranking, due to a lower environmental impact and lower cost of materials.
Extent
52 P.
URI: https://repositorio.escuelaing.edu.co/handle/001/3499
Collections

Collections

AN - Grupo de Investigación en Geotecnia
References

ARGOS_360, Caracterización de impactos ambientales en la industria de la construcción, (2020). https://www.360enconcreto.com/blog/detalle/impactosambientales-en-la-industria-de-la-construccion (accessed May 25, 2020).

UEPG, EUROPEAN AGGREGATES ASSOCIATION A Sustainable Industry for a Sustainable Europe, 2017. www.uepg.eu (accessed May 25, 2020).

J. Lehne, F. Preston, Concrete Change Innovation in Low-carbon Cement and Concrete, Chatham Ho, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London, 2018. https://reader.chathamhouse.org/making-concrete-change-innovation-low-carboncement-and-concrete# (accessed May 25, 2020).

C. Medina, I.F. Sáez del Bosque, E. Asensio, M. Frías, M.I. Sánchez de Rojas, New additions for eco-efficient cement design. Impact on calorimetric behaviour and comparison of test methods, Mater. Struct. 49 (2016) 4595–4607. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-016-0809-5.

E. Asensio, C. Medina, M. Frías, M.I.S. de Rojas, Characterization of Ceramic-Based Construction and Demolition Waste: Use as Pozzolan in Cements, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 99 (2016) 4121–4127. https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.14437.

G.M. Sadiqul Islam, M.H. Rahman, N. Kazi, Waste glass powder as partial replacement of cement for sustainable concrete practice, Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 6 (2017) 37– 44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.10.005.

S.-C. Pan, D.-H. Tseng, C.-C. Lee, C. Lee, Influence of the fineness of sewage sludge ash on the mortar properties, Cem. Concr. Res. 33 (2003) 1749–1754. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(03)00165-0

M.C.G. Juenger, R. Snellings, S.A. Bernal, Supplementary cementitious materials: New sources, characterization, and performance insights, Cem. Concr. Res. 122 (2019) 257– 273. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONRES.2019.05.008.

J. Li, W. Zhang, C. Li, P.J.M. Monteiro, Eco-friendly mortar with high-volume diatomite and fly ash: Performance and life-cycle assessment with regional variability, J. 44 Clean. Prod. 261 (2020) 121224. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.121224.

S.A. Miller, Supplementary cementitious materials to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from concrete: can there be too much of a good thing?, J. Clean. Prod. 178 (2018) 587– 598. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.01.008.

J. Li, W. Zhang, C. Li, P.J.M. Monteiro, Green concrete containing diatomaceous earth and limestone: Workability, mechanical properties, and life-cycle assessment, J. Clean. Prod. 223 (2019) 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.03.077.

J. Davidovits, Geopolymer. Chemistry and application, 3rd ed., Institut Géopolymère, 2011. www.geopolymer.org.

X. Zhu, Z. Zhang, K. Yang, B. Magee, Y. Wang, L. Yu, S. Nanukuttan, Q. Li, S. Mu, C. Yang, M. Basheer, Characterisation of pore structure development of alkali-activated slag cement during early hydration using electrical responses, Cem. Concr. Compos. 89 (2018) 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONCOMP.2018.02.016.

X. Zhu, M. Zhang, K. Yang, L. Yu, C. Yang, Setting behaviours and early-age microstructures of alkali-activated ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) from different regions in China, Cem. Concr. Compos. 114 (2020) 103782. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONCOMP.2020.103782.

I. Garcia-Lodeiro, A. Fernández-Jimenez, A. Palomo, Cements with a low clinker content: versatile use of raw materials, J. Sustain. Cem. Mater. 4 (2015) 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650373.2015.1040865

C. Medina, W. Zhu, H. Torsten, M.I. Sánchez de Rojas, F. Moisés, Influence of mixed recycled aggregate on the physical – mechanical properties of recycled concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 68 (2014) 216–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2014.01.002.

A. Gonzalez-Corominas, M. Etxeberria, C.-S. Poon, Influence of the Quality of 45 Recycled Aggregates on the Mechanical and Durability Properties of High Performance Concrete, Waste Biomass Valor. 8 (2017) 1421–1432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649- 016-9637-7.

A. López-Uceda, J. Ayuso, M. López, J.R. Jimenez, F. Agrela, M.J. Sierra, Properties of non-structural concrete made with mixed recycled aggregates and low cement content, Materials (Basel). 9 (2016) 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9020074.

J.L. Provis, S.A. Bernal, Geopolymers and Related Alkali-Activated Materials, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-matsci-070813-113515.

J.L. Provis, Geopolymers and other alkali activated materials: Why, how, and what?, Mater. Struct. Constr. 47 (2014) 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1617/S11527-013-0211- 5/FIGURES/6.

I. Lecomte, C. Henrist, M. Liégeois, F. Maseri, A. Rulmont, R. Cloots, (Micro)- structural comparison between geopolymers, alkali-activated slag cement and Portland cement, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 26 (2006) 3789–3797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2005.12.021.

M.T. Junaid, O. Kayali, A. Khennane, J. Black, A mix design procedure for low calcium alkali activated fly ash-based concretes, Constr. Build. Mater. 79 (2015) 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.048.

P. Zhang, Y. Zheng, K. Wang, J. Zhang, A review on properties of fresh and hardened geopolymer mortar, Composites. 152 (2018) 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.06.031.

B. Yan, P. Duan, D. Ren, Mechanical strength, surface abrasion resistance and microstructure of fly ash-metakaolin-sepiolite geopolymer composites, Ceram. Int. 43 (2017) 1052–1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.10.039.

C.R. Meesala, N.K. Verma, S. Kumar, Critical review on fly‐ash based geopolymer concrete, Struct. Concr. (2019) 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201900326.

P. Duxson, J.L. Provis, G.C. Lukey, J.S.J. van Deventer, The role of inorganic polymer technology in the development of “green concrete,” Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (2007) 1590– 1597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.08.018.

S.H. Teh, T. Wiedmann, A. Castel, J. De Burgh, Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia, J. Clean. Prod. 152 (2017) 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.122.

D.A. Salas, A.D. Ramirez, N. Ulloa, H. Baykara, A.J. Boero, Life cycle assessment of geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 190 (2018) 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.123.

A. Passuello, E.D. Rodríguez, E. Hirt, M. Longhi, S.A. Bernal, J.L. Provis, A.P. Kirchheim, Evaluation of the potential improvement in the environmental footprint of geopolymers using waste-derived activators, J. Clean. Prod. 166 (2017) 680–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.007.

R. Bajpai, K. Choudhary, A. Srivastava, K. Singh Sangwan, M. Singh, Environmental impact assessment of fly ash and silica fume based geopolymer concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 254 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120147.

I. Muñoz, J. Alonso-Madrid, M. Menéndez-Muñiz, M. Uhart, J. Canou, C. Martin, M. Fabritius, L. Calvo, L. Poudelet, R. Cardona, H. Lombois-Burger, N. Vlasopoulos, C. Bouyssou, J. Dirrenberger, A. Papacharalampopoulos, P. Stavropoulos, Life cycle assessment of integrated additive-subtractive concrete 3D printing, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 112 (2021) 2149–2159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06487- 0/Published.

H. Alhumayani, M. Gomaa, V. Soebarto, W. Jabi, Environmental assessment of largescale 3D printing in construction: A comparative study between cob and concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 270 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122463.

M. Mohammad, E. Masad, S.G. Al-Ghamdi, 3D Concrete Printing Sustainability: A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Four Construction Method Scenarios, Buildings. 10 (2020) 245. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10120245.

Y. Han, Z. Yang, T. Ding, J. Xiao, Environmental and economic assessment on 3D printed buildings with recycled concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 278 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123884

A. Siddika, M. Abdullah_Al_Mamum, W. Ferdous, A. Kumer_Saha, R. Alyousef, 3Dprinted concrete: applications, performance, and challenges, J. Sustain. Cem. Mater. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/21650373.2019.1705199.

S. El-Sayegh, L. Romdhane, S. Manjikian, A critical review of 3D printing in construction: benefits, challenges, and risks, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43452-020-00038-w.

E. Elizondo-Martínez, V. Andrés-Valeri, J. Rodríguez-Hernández, C. Sangiorgi, Selection of Additives and Fibers for Improving the Mechanical and Safety Properties of Porous Concrete Pavements through Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis, (2020).

A. Hafezalkotob, A. Hafezalkotob, Extended MULTIMOORA method based on Shannon entropy weight for materials selection, J. Ind. Eng. Int. 12 (2015) 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40092-015-0123-9.

A. Mardani, M. Nilashi, N. Zakuan, N. Loganathan, S. Soheilirad, M.Z.M. Saman, O. Ibrahim, A systematic review and meta-Analysis of SWARA and WASPAS methods: Theory and applications with recent fuzzy developments, Appl. Soft Comput. 57 (2017) 48 265–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2017.03.045.

C.J. Slebi-Acevedo, P. Pascual-Muñoz, P. Lastra-González, D. Castro-Fresno, A multicriteria decision-making analysis for the selection of fibres aimed at reinforcing asphalt concrete mixtures, Int. J. Pavement Eng. 0 (2019) 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2019.1645848.

O. Ly, A.I. Yoris-Nobile, N. Sebaibi, E. Blanco-Fernandez, M. Boutouil, D. CastroFresno, A.E. Hall, R.J.H. Herbert, W. Deboucha, B. Reis, J.N. Franco, M.T. Borges, I. Sousa-Pinto, P. Van Der Linden, R. Stafford, Optimisation of 3D printed concrete for artificial reefs: Biofouling and mechanical analysis, Constr. Build. Mater. 272 (2021) 121649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121649.

Z.T. Yao, X.S. Ji, P.K. Sarker, J.H. Tang, L.Q. Ge, M.S. Xia, Y.Q. Xi, A comprehensive review on the applications of coal fly ash, Earth-Science Rev. 141 (2015) 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EARSCIREV.2014.11.016.

A.R.K. Gollakota, V. Volli, C.M. Shu, Progressive utilisation prospects of coal fly ash: A review, Sci. Total Environ. 672 (2019) 951–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.03.337.

T. Xie, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Behavior of low-calcium fly and bottom ash-based geopolymer concrete cured at ambient temperature, Ceram. Int. 41 (2015) 5945–5958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.01.031

L.N. Assi, E. Deaver, M.K. ElBatanouny, P. Ziehl, Investigation of early compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 807– 815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.008.

H. Rashidian-Dezfouli, P.R. Rangaraju, A comparative study on the durability of geopolymers produced with ground glass fiber, fly ash, and glass-powder in sodium 49 sulfate solution, Constr. Build. Mater. 153 (2017) 996–1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2017.07.139

G. Görhan, G. Kürklü, The influence of the NaOH solution on the properties of the fly ash-based geopolymer mortar cured at different temperatures, Compos. Part B Eng. 58 (2014) 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2013.10.082.

R. Abbas, M.A. Khereby, · Hanaa, Y. Ghorab, · N Elkhoshkhany, H.Y. Ghorab, N. Elkhoshkhany, Preparation of geopolymer concrete using Egyptian kaolin clay and the study of its environmental effects and economic cost, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy. 22 (2020) 669–687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01811-4.

UNE-EN 933-1, Tests for geometrical properties of aggregates. Part 1: Determination of particle size distribution - Sieving method., AENOR - Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación, 2012.

R. Rodríguez-Álvaro, Morteros para revestimiento con árido procedente de concha de mejillón, Universidade da Coruña, 2014. https://ruc.udc.es/dspace/handle/2183/13632 (accessed June 27, 2019).

C. Martínez García, Estudio del comportamiento de la concha de mejillón como árido para la fabricación de hormigones en masa: aplicación en la cimentación de un módulo experimental (Módulo Biovalvo), Universidade da Coruña, 2016. https://ruc.udc.es/dspace/handle/2183/17489 (accessed June 27, 2019).

W.-J. Long, J.-L. Tao, C. Lin, Y.-C. Gu, L. Mei, H.-B. Duan, F. Xing, Rheology and buildability of sustainable cement-based composites containing micro-crystalline cellulose for 3D-printing, J. Clean. Prod. 239 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118054.

R.A. Buswell, W.R. Leal de Silva, S.Z. Jones, J. Dirrenberger, 3D printing using 50 concrete extrusion: A roadmap for research, Cem. Concr. Res. 112 (2018) 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONRES.2018.05.006.

P. Estellé, C. Lanos, A. Perrot, S. Amziane, Processing the vane shear flow data from couette analogy, Appl. Rheol. 18 (2008) 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1515/arh-2008-0009.

C. Lanos, P. Estellé, Vers une réelle rhéométrie adaptée aux bétons frais, Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. 13 (2009) 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2009.9693123.

P. Estellé, C. Lanos, A. Perrot, Processing the Couette viscometry data using a Bingham approximation in shear rate calculation, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 154 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2008.01.006.

UNE-EN_196-1, Methods of testing cement. Part 1: Determination of strength., AENOR - Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación, 2018.

Ministerio_de_Fomento, Base de precios de referencia de la dirección generla de carreteras, (2016).

M.B. Solutions, Productos y sistemas BASF. Construction Chemicals España, S.L., (2017).

ISO_14040, ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework, 2 nd. International Organization for Standardization, 2006.

ISO_14044, ISO 14044: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and Guidelines, 1 edn. International Organization for Standardization, 2006.

E.R. Grist, K.A. Paine, A. Heath, J. Norman, H. Pinder, The environmental credentials of hydraulic lime-pozzolan concretes, J. Clean. Prod. 93 (2015) 26–37. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.047.

NREL, U.S. Life Cycle Invent. Database. (2012).

L.K. Turner, F.G. Collins, Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: A comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 43 (2013) 125– 130. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.023.

UNE-EN_15804, UNE-EN 15804:2012+A1:2013. Sustainability of construction works. Environmental product declarations. Core rules for the product category of construction products, 2012.

E. Lizasoain-Arteaga, I. Indacoechea-Vega, P. Pascual-Muñoz, D. Castro-Fresno, Environmental impact assessment of induction-healed asphalt mixtures, J. Clean. Prod. 208 (2019) 1546–1556. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.223.

T.. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, planning, priority setting, resource allocation, 1980

E. Wang, N. Alp, J. Shi, C. Wang, X. Zhang, H. Chen, Multi-criteria building energy performance benchmarking through variable clustering based compromise TOPSIS with objective entropy weighting, Energy. 125 (2017) 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.131.

Z. Wang, W. Zhan, Dynamic Engineering Multi-criteria Decision Making Model Optimized by Entropy Weight for Evaluating Bid, Syst. Eng. Procedia. 5 (2012) 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sepro.2012.04.008.

C.L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications., Berlín:Springer. (1981).

E.K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, J. Antucheviciene, A. Zakarevicius, Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment, Elektron. Ir Elektrotechnika. 122 (2012) 3–6.

A. Gholampour, V.D. Ho, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Ambient-cured geopolymer mortars prepared with waste-based sands: Mechanical and durability-related properties and microstructure, Compos. Part B Eng. 160 (2019) 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2018.12.057

P. Chen, Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method, 136 (2019) 33– 41.