Environmental and economic assessment of whitetoppings made with sustainable concrete mixtures having ground granulated blast furnace slag, recycled concrete aggregates and hybrid fibres
Source abstract
Abstract
Whitetoppings offer a sustainable repair solution for damaged bituminous pavements, though with higher cost and environmental concerns due to high cement and aggregates usage. This study explores alternative concretes for whitetoppings by partially replacing cement and natural coarse aggregates with ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and recycled concrete aggregates (RCA), respectively. Hybrid fibre combinations of macro-steel with micro-polypropylene and macro-steel with micro-glass were incorporated to enhance post-cracking performnce and reduce whitetopping thickness. Environmental and economic assessments of ultra-thin whiteteoppings (UTW) designed with proposed alternative concretes showed 27–35% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, 30–42% lower cumulative energy demand and 45–50% lower ReCiPe 2016 single score compared to conventional design solution. Sensitivity analysis assessed uncertainty in impact assessment due to variations in input parameters. Despite higher material and transportation costs of fibres, overall UTW cost was similar to or lower than that of conventional concrete. The results were utilised to form an integrated framework for ranking the design sections by MCDM approach.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance · Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Civil Engineering, Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam, affiliated to APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Kerala, India
Environmental Sciences and Sustainable Engineering Center (ESSENCE), Indian Institute of Technology, Palakkad, Kerala, India
References (91)
Show source-provided references
1. Retrieval January 10 2025 from https://www.volvoce.com/united-states/en-us/services/volvo-services/fuel-efficiency-services/fuel-efficiency-guarantee/
2. Retrieval January 10 2025 from https://www.apolloinffratech.com/product/slip-form-concrete-road-paver
3. Retrieval January 10 2025 from https://www.concatindia.in/road-equipments-machinery.html
4. Retrieval January 10 2025 from https://pavementinteractive.org/reference-desk/pavement-management/analysis/life-cycle-assessment-of-portland-cement-concrete-interstate-highway-rehabilitation-and-replacement-2/
5. PRe´ Consultants SimaPro LCA software version 9.5.0.2.
6. 10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e0068310.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00683 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10893710.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108937 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.17610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.176 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.08.00810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.08.008 ↗
10. American Concrete Pavement Association. (1998). Whitetopping- State of the Practice. ACPA Skokie Illinois USA.
11. Analysis of Rates. (2023). Central public works department. Government of India New Delhi.
12. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.11769710.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117697 ↗
13. 10.1080/14680629.2021.192631110.1080/14680629.2021.1926311 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11995210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119952 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.00310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.003 ↗
16. 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.000033910.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000339 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.04310.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.043 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.06.00410.1016/j.cemconres.2011.06.004 ↗
19. 10.1007/978-3-031-61585-6_310.1007/978-3-031-61585-6_3 ↗
20. 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.000034910.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000349 ↗
21. 10.1080/23270012.2020.174852810.1080/23270012.2020.1748528 ↗
22. 10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w ↗
23. 10.1080/14680629.2017.141789010.1080/14680629.2017.1417890 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.11875510.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118755 ↗
25. Goedkoop M. Heijungs R. Huijbregts M. Schryver A. D. Struijs J. V. Z. R. & Van Zelm R. (2009). A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonized category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. The Hague Ministry of VROM. ReCiPe.
26. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000086210.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000862 ↗
27. Federal Highway Administration Harvey J. Meijer J. Ozer H. Al-Qadi I. L. Saboori A. & Kendall A. (2016). Pavement life cycle assessment framework (No. FHWA-HIF-16-014).
28. 10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(1998)4:3(111)10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(1998)4:3(111) ↗
29. Huijbregts M. A. Steinmann Z. J. Elshout P. M. Stam G. Verones F. Vieira M. D. Hollander A. Zijp M. & Van Zelm R. (2016). ReCiPe 2016: A harmonized life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level-report I: characterization. RIVM Report 2016-0104 National Institute for Public Health and the Environment Netherlands.10.1007/s11367-016-1246-y ↗
30. 10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_310.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3 ↗
31. Inti, S., Sharma, M., & Tandon, V. (2017). Life-cycle assessment of road pavements containing marginal materials: Comparative analysis based on a real case study. In I. L. Al-Qadi, H. Ozer, & J. Harvey (Eds.), Pavement life-cycle assessment (pp. 155–166). CRC Press.
32. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.03.04210.1016/j.jenvman.2016.03.042 ↗
33. IRC SP 46. 2013. ‘Guidelines for design and construction of fibre reinforced concrete pavements’ Indian Road Congress New Delhi.
34. IRC SP 76. 2015. ‘Guide lines for conventional and thin whitetopping’ Indian Road Congress New Delhi.
35. IS 10000 (Part 4). 1980. ‘Methods of tests for internal combustion engines: Declaration of power efficiency fuel consumption and lubricating oil consumption’ Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
36. IS 10262. 2019. ‘Concrete mix proportioning – guidelines’ Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
37. IS 16714. 2018. Ground granulated blast furnace slag for use in cement mortar and concrete – specification Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
38. IS 17161. 2020. Flexural strength and toughness parameters of fibre reinforced concrete – method of test Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
39. IS 1791. 2020. General requirements for batch type concrete mixers Bureau of Indian Standards. New Delhi.
40. IS 269. 2015. Ordinary Portland cement – specification Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
41. IS 383. 2016. ‘Coarse and fine aggregate for concrete - specification’ Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
42. IS 456. 2000. ‘Plain and reinforced concrete – code of practice’ Bureau of Indian Standards New Delhi.
43. ISO 14040. 2006. ‘Environmental management. Life cycle assessment: Principles and framework’ International Organisation for Standardization.
44. ISO 14044. 2006. ‘Environment management. Life cycle assessment: Requirements and guidelines’ International Organisation for Standardization.
45. 10.1016/j.matdes.2011.09.00510.1016/j.matdes.2011.09.005 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.10926110.1016/j.jobe.2024.109261 ↗
47. 10.1080/14680629.2016.120755610.1080/14680629.2016.1207556 ↗
48. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2004)16:6(597)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2004)16:6(597) ↗
49. 10.1080/14680629.2022.213928510.1080/14680629.2022.2139285 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.07.00410.1016/j.resconrec.2018.07.004 ↗
51. 10.3390/futuretransp201001410.3390/futuretransp2010014 ↗
52. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2005)17:5(595)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2005)17:5(595) ↗
53. Limbachiya, M., Meddah, M. S., & Ouchagour, Y. (2012). Use of recycled concrete aggregate in fly-ash concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 27(1), 439–449.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.07.023 ↗
54. 10.1007/s11356-024-33868-910.1007/s11356-024-33868-9 ↗
55. 10.1533/9780857098993.1.4510.1533/9780857098993.1.45 ↗
56. 10.1533/9780857097729.2.23910.1533/9780857097729.2.239 ↗
57. McGhee, K. H. (1994). Portland cement concrete resurfacing (Vol. 204). Transportation Research Board.
58. 10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0371210.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03712 ↗
59. 10.1080/14680629.2020.186197010.1080/14680629.2020.1861970 ↗
60. 10.3390/su15171274610.3390/su151712746 ↗
61. 10.1016/S0956-053X(00)00100-810.1016/S0956-053X(00)00100-8 ↗
62. 10.1007/s12046-019-1255-110.1007/s12046-019-1255-1 ↗
63. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.13027010.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130270 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.22010.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.220 ↗
65. 10.1201/9781003092278-3810.1201/9781003092278-38 ↗
66. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12126410.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121264 ↗
67. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13258210.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132582 ↗
68. Pasetto, M., Pasquini, E., Giacomello, G., & Baliello, A. (2017). Life-cycle assessment of road pavements containing marginal materials: Comparative analysis based on a real case study. In I. L. Al-Qadi, H. Ozer, & J. Harvey (Eds.), Pavement life-cycle assessment (pp. 199–208). CRC Press.
69. 10.1080/1029843050006867010.1080/10298430500068670 ↗
70. Riley R. C. Titus-Glover L. Mallela J. Waalkes S. & Darter M. (2005 April 12–15). Incorporation of probabilistic concepts into fatigue analysis of ultrathin whitetopping as developed for the American concrete pavement association. Proceedings of the International Conference on Best Practices for Ultrathin and Thin Whitetoppings (pp. 288–317). Denver Colorado.
71. United States Federal Highway Administration Roesler J. Bordelon A. Ioannides A. Beyer M. & Wang D. (2008). Design and concrete material requirements for ultra-thin whitetopping. Technical report Illinois Center for Transportation (No. FHWA-ICT-08-016).
72. 10.18260/1-2--1166510.18260/1-2--11665 ↗
73. 10.3846/13923730.2013.79909310.3846/13923730.2013.799093 ↗
74. SA NB. (2021). Dramix® steel fibres for concrete reinforcement. Environmental product declaration.
75. 10.1088/1748-9326/4/3/03401110.1088/1748-9326/4/3/034011 ↗
76. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.00910.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.009 ↗
77. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.01010.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.010 ↗
78. 10.1080/10298436.2016.127459810.1080/10298436.2016.1274598 ↗
79. Schedule of Rates. (2023). Central public works department Government of India New Delhi.
80. 10.1007/978-3-031-61585-6_1010.1007/978-3-031-61585-6_10 ↗
81. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.28810.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.288 ↗
82. 10.1080/10298436.2021.202140610.1080/10298436.2021.2021406 ↗
83. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.10495310.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104953 ↗
84. 10.1080/15623599.2020.174262910.1080/15623599.2020.1742629 ↗
85. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12306610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123066 ↗
86. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.13021910.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130219 ↗
87. Thomas, T. S., Sankaran, V., Jisha, K. V., & Dhanya, B. S. (2021). Sustainability assessment of M25 grade recycled aggregate concrete. The Indian Concrete Journal, 95(5), 51–62.
88. 10.1061/9780784412435.08110.1061/9780784412435.081 ↗
89. 10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00913-410.1016/S0008-8846(02)00913-4 ↗
90. 10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.000004210.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000042 ↗
91. Zhu, Y., Tian, D., & Yan, F. (2020). Effectiveness of entropy weight method in decision-making. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020(1), 3564835.