Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Review

Green concrete: Prospects and 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 a b s t r a c t

Article history: Utilization of green concrete in construction is increasingly adopted by the construction industry owing
Received 28 April 2017 to the drawbacks of conventional concrete and the numerous inherent benefits of green concrete. The
Received in revised form 29 August 2017 increasing demand for green concrete has been spurred by demand for high quality concrete products,
Accepted 1 September 2017
desire of nations to reduce green-house gas emission, need for conservation of natural resources and lim-
Available online 20 September 2017
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
Keywords:
offers numerous environmental, technical benefits and economic benefits such as high strength,
Green concrete
High-volume fly ash concrete
increased durability, improved workability and pumpability, reduced permeability, controlled bleeding,
Ultra-high performance concrete superior resistance to acid attack, and reduction of plastic shrinkage cracking. These characteristics pro-
Lightweight concrete motes faster concrete production, reduction of curing waiting time, reduction of construction costs, early
Geopolymer concrete 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

⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: kmliew@cityu.edu.hk (K.M. Liew), zlvwen@hotmail.com (L.W. Zhang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.008
0950-0618/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1064 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

Nomenclature

SCM Supplementary cementitious material NanoA Nano-Al2 O3

SF Silica fume CNI Calcium nitrite-based corrosion inhibitor
RHA Rice husk ash FA50L 50%Fly ash content
GGBS & GGBFS Ground granulated blast-furnace slag HVFAC High-volume fly ash concrete
WG Waste glass HPSCC High performance self-consolidating concrete
NS Nano-silica FA Fly ash
PPF Polypropylene fibres CRT Cathode ray tube waste glass
BOFS Basic oxygen furnace slag GFRP Glass fibre reinforced polymer
RAC Recycled aggregate concrete CS Compressive strength
FFA Fine fly ash SP Superplasticizer
RHAC Rice husk ash concrete w/b water binder ratio
FAC Fly ash concrete w/cm water-cementitious ratio
FA-HSC Fly ash-based high strength concrete w/scm water-supplementary cementitious materials ratio
SFC Silica fume concrete ASR Alkali silica reaction
UHPC Ultra-high performance concrete RPC Reactive powder concrete
WGC Waste glass concrete MK Metakaolin
GF Glass fume from waste glass SiO2Eff Effective amorphous silica content
C3S (tricalcium silicate) Seff Effective surface area of SCM
C2S (dicalcium silicate) CN Carbon nanotube
RHAC Rice husk ash concrete HSC High strength concrete
SCC Self-consolidating concrete UHPC Ultra high strength concrete
HPC High-performance concrete LWC Lightweight concrete
AA Alternative aggregates BRAC Bacterial rice husk ash concrete
OPC Ordinary Portland cement CRHA Rice husk ash from controlled burning
RRHA Raw rice hush ash

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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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].
Rice Corn Sawd
Agricultur
husk cob ust
al wastes ash ash ash
Granula
ted
Industrial Fly Silica
wastes ash fume
blast
furnace
slag
Municipal Glass Plascs Paper
wastes
Fig. 1. Categories of Wastes utilized in Green Concrete.
1065
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 ðd50 Þ [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 ðd50 Þ. 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):
apz
Df pz ¼  c ð1Þ
1 þ Sb
eff
where Df pz = 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 Ss xgP 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].
Min ðp; pmax Þ  SiO2Amorphous
SiO2Eff ¼ ð3Þ
1  Minðp; pmax Þ
where SiO2Eff = effective amorphous silica content (%);SiO2Amorphous
= amorphous silica content of RHA samples; p = % RHA replacement
of cement, which could reach up to maximum ðPmax Þ. SiO2Eff is the
amount of amorphous SiO2 that is able to react, given the replace-
ment level p, maximum replacement level pmax and amorphous sil-
1066 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
160 y = 21.86x + 35.46
R² = 0.974
140
120
BET SSA (m2/g)
100
80
60
40
20
0 and the amount of CaðOHÞ2 produced during cement hydration.
0.35 0.4 0.5 0.57
w/c rao
Fig. 2. Variation of BET SSA of cement with w/c ratio [28].
ica content. The SiO2Eff 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 SiO2Eff 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 SiO2Eff 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 C 3 S (trical-
cium silicate) and C 2 S (dicalcium silicate) varies with cement types
0.7 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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1067

Pozzolanic contribuon, fpz (MPa)

6

5
0.35 w/c
4 0.4 w/c

3 0.5 w/c
0.57 w/c
2
0.7 w/c
1

0
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953
RHA median parcle size, D50 (μm)
Fig. 3. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with Particle size and water-cement ratio.

9
Pozzolanic contribuon, fpz (MPa)

8
7
6
20%
5
30%
4
40%
3
50%
2
60%
1
0
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644 20.953
RHA Parcle Size, D50 (μm)

Fig. 4. Variation of pozzolanic contribution with particle size at different percentage replacements.

9
Pozzolanic contribuon, fpz (MPa)

6
20%
5
30%
4
40%
3
50%
2
60%
1

0
23.582 31.284 52.114 114.523 128.85
BET SSA (m2/g)

Fig. 5. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with BET SSA and percentage replacement.

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
1068 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

9 Negative impacts of waste glass in concrete include slump

Pozzolanic contribuon, fpz(MPa)

8 reduction at high waste glass content as well as decrease in com-

pressive strength [88]. These impacts can be ameliorated by val-
7
orization of waste glass to become glass fume, usage of
6 appropriate w/c ratio and waste glass content.
14.467 μm
5
19.123 μm
4
19.623 μm 3. Activation techniques
3
20.644 μm
2 Activation is necessary to prevent slow and low, early-age
20.953μm
1 strength development and accelerate the pozzolanic reactivity of
SCMs in green concrete. Activation helps to achieve higher early
0
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% and later strength amongst other benefits [89]. Types of activation
techniques available in literature include mechanical activation,
RHA content (%)
chemical activation, curing/temperature activation, water-
Fig. 6. Variation of pozzolanic contribution of RHA with percentage replacement controlled activation and SCM-controlled activation.
using different particle sizes. 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
25 substances to activate the pozzolanicity of cementitious materials
[90]. Curing/temperature activation refers to the use of curing
Effecve surface area (m2/g)

20 medium with age and temperature to achieve property develop-

15
10
5
0 at 50 °C favours pozzolanic behaviour of glass particles which also
14.467 19.123 19.623 20.644
RHA median parcle size, d50 (μm)
Fig. 7. Comparison of pozzolanic contribution using SiO2-Eff and SSAEff..
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 Na2 CO3 and H2 SO4 [84,85]. The recom-
mended optimum percentage as cement and fine aggregate
replacements were 5–10% and 7.5–25% respectively [80,86,87].
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-
SiO2-eff tures above room temperature to activate the reactivity of the con-
SSAeff 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
20.953 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 H2 SO4 , CaCl2 , Na2 SO4 , NaOH,
Na2 CO3 , CaðOHÞ2 , K 2 SO4 , 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
Na2 SO4 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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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 > Na2 CO3 . They also
observed that, in fly-ash binders, the ratio of SiO2 =Na2 O 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 =Na2 O 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
1069
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.
1070 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1071

concrete were plotted in Fig. 8 while the materials used were given Table 1
in Table 1. The three highest CS of 92.1 MPa, 80 MPa and 79 MPa Materials utilized in different green concrete in Fig. 8.

were achieved using SF + ns, SF only and RHA after 90 curing days Author(s) Waste materials used as SCM Type of green
[39,171]. SF was corroborated by Benaicha et al. [172] to produce concrete/mortar
high CS of 82.9 MPa after 28 days curing age. Çakır and SF + RAC Recycled aggregate
Addition of lime to HVFAC and cement to GPC (geopolymer con- Sofyanlı concrete
crete) were shown to aid their CS development [59]. Low CS were [37]
Jalal et al. [39] SF + NS HPSCC
recorded with geopolymers produced with alkali activators which Xu et al. [171] RHA 30 min RHA blended paste
was attributed to their high Si=Al ratio [17,173]. Hwang and Huynh Xu et al. [171] SF RHA blended paste
[17] noted that the development of compressive strength depends Xu et al. [171] Raw RHA RHA blended paste
on appropriate combination of NaOH concentration and RHA Mohseni et al. Cement + RHA + NanoA + PPO Fiber-reinforced
[176] mortar
content.
Mohseni et al. RHA only Fiber-reinforced
Kumar and Gupta [174] recorded CS of 0.2 MPa with Ca/Si ratio [176] mortar
of 0.106, Shatat [175] reported CS of 63.7 MPa at Ca=Si ratio of 0.89 Yang et al. RHA + BOFS RHA-based
while Chindaprasirt et al. [173] recorded <38 MPa with Ca=Si ratio [207] composite
of 7.98 and 0.026 before and after geopolymerisation. Thus, it can Boğa et al. GGBFS + CNI GGBFS modified
[213] concrete
be inferred that high CS is obtained at intermediate Ca=Si between FA50 L HVFAC
0.85 and 1.0. Therefore, it is suggested that chemically complimen- Aliabdo et al. 25%addition of waste glass powder Glass powder
tary waste materials should be utilized in blended concrete appli- [86] (45 MPa cement) mortar
cations to achieve optimum results. Aliabdo et al. 25%cement replacement with WG Glass powder
[86] powder (45 MPa cement) mortar

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-Al2 O3 (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-
Compressive strength at different curing days
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-Al2 O3 , 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-

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
(MPa)

30
20 7
10 28
0
90

Different SCMs ulized in green concrete

Fig. 8. Compressive 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

Flexural strength at different curing days (MPa)

12

10

4
7
2 28
90
0

Different SCMs ulized in green concrete

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

mended curing period between 50 and 90 days. Benaicha et al.

Spling tensile strength at different

8
[172] observed increase in modulus of elasticity (MOE) in SF-
modified concrete with increasing SF contents while Tatikonda 7
curing days (N/mm2)

[183] recommended optimum RHA content of 5% to obtain maxi- 6

mum MOE irrespective of the cement/concrete grade used as dis- 5
played in Fig. 11.
4
In addition, Chik et al. [184] reported increase in MOE with 7
increasing rice husk content and recommended 15% optimum 3 28
RHA cement replacement which also gave the highest compressive 2 90
strength of 6:70 N=mm2 . Siddique and Kaur [185] reported that 1
MOE reduced with increasing elevated temperatures but increased 0
with GGBFS content as displayed in Fig. 12. Abdallah and Fan [145] SF+RAC SF+NS WG WG FA+RHA GGBFS GGBFS
observed increase in MOE with curing age and with increased addion
waste glass content in concrete which was attributed to the higher Different SCMs ulized in green concrete
MOE of waste glass compared to natural glass.
Fig. 10. Splitting tensile strength at different curing days for different SCMs utilized
in green concrete.
5.2.4. Shrinkage and creep
Rovnaník et al. [186] reported increased shrinkage with
increased brick powder waste content because of the high water costs especially for precast elements. Also, results by Haranki
absorption of brick powder waste as shown in Fig. 13. Kayali [188] revealed that care must be taken in the selection and prepa-
[187] reported 33% reduction in shrinkage with fly ash aggregate ration of aggregate to be utilized in green concrete to minimize
as well as 22% reduction in weight and 20% increase in strength. shrinkage in green concrete.
This implies fly ash aggregate can be utilized in the production of According to Serdar et al. [189], the four major types of shrink-
stronger and lighter green concrete with reduced transportation age are plastic shrinkage, carbonation shrinkage, autogenous
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1073

tion can be utilized in construction of road pavement and large

Modulus of elascity for different

50
industrial floors. Ling [195] recommended the use of limewater
45
and ultra-fine fly ash to augment the low-strength development
concrete grade (GPa)

40
of HVFAC.
35
Drying shrinkage has a non-linear relationship with ambient
30
60 relative humidity (RH) [196]. The authors also reported that aggre-
25
80 gate grading and maximum aggregate size affects shrinkage strain.
20
The non-linear relationship grows with increasing aggregate size.
15 100
Drying shrinkage strain of ambient-cured specimens were > com-
10
pared to heat-cured specimens [197].
5
Serdar et al. [189] recommended the utilization of quaternary
0
0 5 10 15 cement blends (FA, slag & limestone) to obtain shrinkage and creep
Rice husk ash content (%) deformation similar to CEM II cement and to minimize negative
impact of binary SCMs in concrete. In addition, Wallah and Rangan
Fig. 11. Modulus of elasticity for different concrete grades of RHA-modified [197] reported that the specific creep of FA-based GPC was < that of
concrete [183]. 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
Reducon in Modulus of elascity at

increase in the creep resistance of FA-based GPC compared to

different elevated temperature(%)

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5 the unreacted FA remaining in the concrete. As much as 50% creep
0 reduction was reported by combined effect of SP and HVFA [201].
0 20
GGBFS cement replacement (%)
Fig. 12. Reduction in modulus of elasticity at different elevated temperature (°C) at
different GGBFS content [185].
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-
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
100 and specific creep of FA-based GPC decreased with increasing CS.
200 High creep strains were observed at early ages of HVFAC
because of slow strength development [62,200]. The low creep
300
strains of HVFAC was attributed to the ‘micro-aggregate effect’ of
40 60 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

5
Shrinkage (%)

0
04:00 03:01 1.5:1.5 00:04
Fly ash/Brick powder rao
Fig. 13. Effects of brick powder content on shrinkage [186].
1074 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

times greater than compressive creep and that both are affected by to 0.65 and that chloride penetration control of RHA was higher
relative humidity. The author also reported that ultimate tensile compared to SF (see Fig. 19).
creep has a decreasing non-linear relationship with compressive Parghi and Alam [208] recommended inclusion of 25% recycled
strength for different applied stresses and that the presence of glass particle of size < 300 lm in combination with 10% FA+ 10% SF
microcracks in the ITZ enhances tensile creep. 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
5.3. Durability properties
sand replacement with curing age. This occurrence was attributed
to reduction in available alkali due to the consumption of lime by
5.3.1. Water absorption and porosity
the silica in the finely grounded waste glass.
Yang et al. [207] recommended a maximum cement replace-
SF was also observed to exhibit about 40% and 14.3% chloride
ment levels 6 60% in order to avoid adverse impact on the perfor-
penetration resistance more than RHA at the same cement replace-
mance of the concrete as a result of increased water demand of the
ment ratio of 5% and 10% and w=b ratio of 0.6 and 3 days curing age
SCM. It was also noted that water absorption of ternary blends
[34]. Chloride penetration resistance of 11.9% and 50% for RHA and
cement comprising RHA and BOF produced by Yang et al. [207]
52.4% and 64.3% for SF at 5% and 10% cement replacements respec-
was less than that of ternary blend derived from fly ash and lime-
tively were recorded at 91 days–3 days curing age.
stone by Shafigh et al. [57].
Hassan et al. [214] reported that SF achieved lowest chloride
Parghi and Alam [208] observed that water absorption reduced
penetration compared to FA and OPC at both early ages but compa-
with increase in recycled glass powder content while bulk density
rable characteristics with SF at long-term ages. In HPC, SF was
decreases. Aliabdo et al. [59] reported that cement addition caused
found to contribute more to permeability reduction (87%) and pore
decrease in both water absorption and porosity of GPC as revealed
reduction (25%) than CS. Rostami and Behfarnia [215] reported
in Fig. 14.
chloride penetration resistance of 26.7%, 38.5% and 49.6% at 5%,
In another study by Aliabdo et al. [86], water absorption and
10% and 15% SF replacement of cement.
voids ratio was found to reduce with increase in waste glass pow-
Zareei et al. [216] achieved 78.4% reduction in chloride penetra-
der addition as a result of the pore filling and pozzolanic action of
tion in HPC containing 25% RHA replacement of cement and 10%
waste glass powder. Investigation by Binici [209] revealed that
microsilica from 4306 Coulumbs to 928 Coulombs. [157] achieved
water absorption reduces with increase in alkali activation temper-
52.36% reduction in chloride penetration from 19 mm to 9.5 mm
ature but the reduction exhibited differs from one material to
through the use of HVFA SCC containing 60% FA and 10% SF. They
another as depicted in Fig. 15.
reported that concrete cover of 20 mm concrete cover is not suffi-
Tian and Zhang [210] reported that water absorption and
cient to protect steel reinforcement from chloride ingress even in
apparent porosity varies with different curing ages and fly ash-
high quality SCC.
cement ratios as displayed in Figs. 16 and 17. This implies that
Matos and Sousa-Coutinho [217] reported that SF and WG were
SCM-cement ratio, the apparent porosity and water absorption of
effective in reduction of ASR. A reduction of 76.85% reduction was
the SCM used in a green concrete affects their mechanical perfor-
achieved at 20% WG content. Waste glass powder also achieved
mance. Hesami et al. [21] also reported decrease in porosity with
52.47% reduction in chloride diffusion in mortar. An optimum of
increase in RHA combined with PPS, glass and steel fibres irrespec-
10% WG content was recommended to achieve best durability
tive of water-cement ratio and recommended optimum RHA con-
properties [152].
tent of between 8 and 10% and water-cement ratio of 0.33.
Siddique and Bennacer [169] reported improved chloride bind-
Momtazi and Zanoosh [211] reported that waste rubber tire and
ing capacity with increasing GGBS content but it is affected by the
polypropylene fibre (PPF) can be used to reduce water absorption
presence of sulfates. Cheng et al. [218] reported 81.9% chloride
of RHA-cement composite.
penetration resistance using 60% GGBS replacement of cement at
w/cm ratio of 0.55 from 10271coulombs to 1864 coulombs. The
5.3.2. Chloride penetration and alkali silica reaction (ASR) improvement in chloride penetration resistance was attributed to
Siddique et al. [212] reported improved resistance to chloride pore refinement and densification of the concrete system.
penetration with bacterial rice husk ash concrete (BRHAC) com- Cracking potential can be minimized by limiting unrestrained
pared to results obtained by Boğa et al. [213] as shown in Fig. 18 shrinkage of concrete mixtures [219]. Their results showed that
and recommended 10% RHA replacement of cement as optimum FA exhibited the greatest drying shrinkage compared to nanosilica
value. Gastaldini et al. [34] revealed that lower chloride penetra- and GGBS cement. Also, chloride penetration was observed to
tion was obtained at lower water/cement ratio of 0.5 compared reduce with increasing curing age, increasing cement replacements

12
Water absorpon (%)

10

8
Porosity (%)

6
WA
4 Porosity

0
0% 5% 10% 15%
Cement addion to Geopolymer concrete (%)

Fig. 14. Effects of cement addition in geopolymer concrete [59].

 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1075

Water absorpon (%) at different

14

acvaon temperature
12

10

8
100
6
150
4

0
GGBFS Fly ash Silica sand Pumice
Different materials used as alkali acvators
Fig. 15. Water absorption for different materials at varied activation temperatures (°C) [209].

Rapid chloride permeability at different

12000
Water absorpon at different fly

25
10000
ash-cement raos (%)

curing days (Coulombs)

20
8000
15
7
10 1.2 6000
28
1.6
5 4000 56
2
90
0
2000
28 days
3 months
6 months
10 months 0
RHAC BRHAC GGBFS+CNI GGBFS+CNI GGBFS
Water curing ages
Different SCMs used in green concrete
Fig. 16. Water absorption of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and
fly ash-cement ratios [210]. Fig. 18. Rapid chloride penetration at different curing days for different SCMs.
curing ages, different concrete grades &
Apparent porosity at different fly ash-

60
Compressive strength at different

27
different acid soluons (N/mm 2)

26 50 28M40H2SO4
cement raos (%)

28M40HCl
25 40
28M20H2SO4
1.2 30
24 28M20HCl
1.6
20 90M40H2SO4
23
2
90M40HCl
22 10
90M20H2SO4
21 0 90M20HCl
28 days 3 months 6 months 10 months 0% 30% 40% 50%
Water curing age GGBFS replacement of cement

Fig. 17. Apparent porosity of fly ash/bagasse composite at different curing ages and Fig. 19. Compressive strength at different GGBFS cement replacements, different
fly ash-cement ratios [210]. curing age, different grades of concrete in different acid solutions [138].

with RHA and SF but reduced with increasing w/b ratio. Balapour the same experimental conditions such as similar cement replace-
et al. [220] reported that combination of nano-RHA (2.5%) and ment levels, w/cm ratio, curing age at testing, amongst others for
micro-RHA (12.5%) produced the best chloride penetration resis- accurate comparison purposes.
tance. In fact, their combination achieved chloride penetration Alkali silica reaction is a concrete durability problem where sil-
resistance of 71.2% at 90 days compared to control. This value ica forms in aggregates react with alkali pore solutions to form
was higher than 36.2% recorded by 2.5% nano-RHA utilized alone. expansive reaction products, resulting in deleterious concrete
From the results above, it seems the order of preference in cracking [221]. Effectiveness of any SCM to mitigate ASR depends
terms of resistance to chloride penetration is GGBS > RHA > SF > on the SCM composition (SiO2 and alkali content), SCM %, type of
FA > WG. However, experiments are required to check or confirm alkali aggregate reaction, type and fineness of alkali-contents of
this order of preference for chloride penetration resistance using cement [222]. SCMs reduce ASR through pozzolanic reaction which
1076 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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 Li2 CO3 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 Na2 SiO3 =KOH of 2.5 and
FA=activ ator 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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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%
1077
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 H2 SO4 . The resistance to acid
attack was observed to be directly proportional to the
ðSiO2 þ Al2 O3 þ Fe2 O3 Þ=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 Al2 O3 [227]. Strength improvement was also recorded at 25%
RHA replacement of cement with 0.1 H2 SO4 [249].
Chemical resistance of FA and SF to several chemical such as
H2 SO4 , HNO3 , acetic acid, H3 PO4 , Na2 SO4 , 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 C 3 S and C 2 S 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
1078 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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 Al2 O3 (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.
Boğa 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
100
80
Composion (%)
60
40
20
0
SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO
Chemical composion
FA
Fig. 20. Comparison of chemical composition of different SCMs and OPC (Authors).
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.
MgO SO3 Na2O K2O P205 TiO2 LOI
WG GGBFS RHA SF OPC
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1079

35

30

Flexural strength (Mpa)

25

20 Bauxite Steam cured

15 Bauxite Autoclaved cured

Granite steam cured
10
Granite Autoclaved cured

0
20 40 60
GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%)

Fig. 21. Effect of curing condition on Flexural strength and aggregate type [232].

350 crete), UHPC (ultra-high performance concrete), HPC (high perfor-

mance concrete), ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), HSC (high
Compressive strength (Mpa)

300
strength concrete), SCC (self-consolidating concrete), LWC (light-
250 weight concrete) and geopolymer concrete (GPC).

200
8.1. HVFAC (High volume fly ash concrete)
150 Bauxite autoclaved cured
High-volume fly ash concrete (HVFAC) are concrete mixtures
100 Bauxite standard cured
containing a minimum of 40–50% fly ash by mass of cementitious
50 materials [133,276]. HVFAC with 50% cement replacement with fly
ash C was utilized in the construction of Computer Science Build-
0 ing at York University and Lower Notch Dam in Ontario, Canada
20 40 60 and Bayview high-rise apartment and was recommended for com-
GGBFS replacement of silica fume (%)
mercial and residential construction applications [61,277].
Fig. 22. Comparison of compressive strength using autoclaved and standard curing The strength development of HVFAC depends on fly ash replace-
media [232]. 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
8. Nomenclature and applications of green concrete utilized in of natural sand as fine aggregate, Li [106] recommended the addi-
concrete structures tion of nano-SiO2 as an accelerating additive to facilitate the poz-
zolanic properties of fly ash to improve the early and long-term
Existing literatures on green concrete revealed the existence of strength gain.
different nomenclatures for green concrete depending on the SCM Mehta [280] classified HVFAC into three categories namely low,
utilized, properties of the green concrete such as compressive moderate and high strength HVFAC with minimum CS28 of 20, 30
strength, performance levels, compactability and density as and 40 and corresponding water-cement ratios of 0.9–1.3, 0.72–
depicted in Fig. 24. They include HVFAC (high-volume fly ash con- 0.83 and 0.5–0.7 respectively.
Compressive strength at different curing

50
40
30
20
days (Mpa)

10 28
0 56
90

Different SCMs used in green concrete

Fig. 23. Compressive strength results for different curing methods.

1080 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
HSC
Geopolymer
concrete UHPC
Green
HVFAC UHSC
concrete
LWC SCC
HPC
Fig. 24. Nomenclatures of green concrete utilized in concrete structures.
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. Vaitkevičius
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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095 1081

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

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
ðCS7 Þ 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

180
Compressive strength (MPa)
Modulus of Elascity (GPa)

160
140
120
100
80 CS
60 MOE
40
20
0
30 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Temperature (OC)
Fig. 25. Compressive strength and Modulus of Elasticity of UHSC at elevated temperatures [263].
1082 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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)
Demirboğa 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,
Erdoğdu 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-
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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% Na2 O [373].
Torres-Carrasco and Puertas [381] demonstrated that waste glass
is an effective alkaline activator in GP Al2 O3 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, % Na2 O, and alkali
activator ratio. The recommended optimal level of 100% glass,
60 °C and 10% Na2 O using Na2 CO3 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.
1083
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-Al2 O3 fly ash to
low-Al2 O3 fly ash in production of geopolymers because of their
superior performance in terms of CS and microstructure. Geopoly-
mers produced with high-Al2 O3 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
Al2 O3 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 Al2 O3 leads to higher
reactivity, formation of more homogeneous, denser and more com-
pact microstructure, and consequently higher compressive
strength and stability. However, low-Al2 O3 fly 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-Al2 O3 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 Al2 O3 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
1084 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

Table 4 tion technology via construction automation. Automation of green

Differences between Class F and Class C fly ashes [62]. concrete construction, as a result of improved workability and
Class F fly ash Class C fly ash flowability, leads to improvement in labour productivity, safer-
Source Anthracite and Lignite and sub- working environment and improved quality of construction. Sav-
bituminous coal bituminous coal ings in construction time and labour cost was reported by [397]
Composition Aluminium silicate glass Calcium-alumino- through the utilization of green SCC (self-consolidation concrete)
crystalline quartz, silicate glass, hematite with 50% fly ash replacement of cement.
hematite magnetite and magnetite and mullite
mullite
Likewise, the improved pumpability of green concrete has the
Pozzolanicity Less pozzolanic Has higher potential to reduce labour requirements for construction. This find-
properties pozzolanicity ing was corroborated by [395] who reported significant reduction
Cementing agent Needs cementing agents Does not need in labour requirements and material cost. Cost savings of $3, 824,
requirement such as lime or alkali activation
007 was also reported by Ahmad and Shah [398] with the use of
Lime content (%) < 20% lime (Cao) <20%
Early-age strength Early-age properties Greater early-age HSC of 84 MPa compared to conventional concrete of 28 MPa. In
slightly lower strength addition, the excellent workability of green concrete helps to over-
Heat of hydration Produces less heat of Produces more heat of come the difficulties often encountered in conventional concrete
hydration hydration during construction of heavily reinforced structures [399]. Utiliza-
Use in concrete Used for high-volume fly Used for low-volume
tion of green concrete in precast concrete elements has the poten-
ash concrete fly ash concrete
Applications Structural concrete, high- Residential tial to also improve manpower savings [400] and likewise time
performance concrete constructions and savings through the use of fast-curing methods such as steam
and concrete exposed to prohibited for high hot curing and autoclaving, which achieve HSC within two curing
sulphate environments sulphate
days [401,402]. As a result of reduced manpower during concrete
environments
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
[391] for analyzing CS development of fly ash concrete. Compres- supported by [403].
sive stress-strain model was utilized by [56] for predicting strain Retardation experienced in green concrete reported by several
and CS of heat-cured low-calcium GPC. Golewski et al. [392] for- authors [61,404,405] was as a result of inadequate water which
mulated and implemented 3D CSS (compact shear specimen) leads to self-dessication, improper mix proportioning and impro-
numerical model in ABAQUS to study the fracture propagation in per mixing of green concrete mixtures, poor SCM particle prepara-
concrete composite using XFEM. tion and improper curing methods. All these shortcomings are
Analytical methods require some essential information before it linked to inadequate understanding of the roles of SCMs, SCM type
can be used and accurate knowledge of the properties of the con- and content, chemical admixtures and influence of curing temper-
stituent and green concrete [304]. Numerical methods are compu- ature. These shortcomings are overcomed as we learn from past
tationally intensive and use of appropriate law that governs the experiments through data mining and assimilation. The retarda-
properties of the constituent of green concrete and the applied tion effects of GGBS and FA, which is marked by moderate stimu-
loading conditions. In addition, successful applications of numeri- lation of hydration in GGBS and weak hydration in FA at early
cal methods to evaluate green concrete properties are scarce in ages, were attributed to the physico-chemical effects of FA [404].
literature. On the other hand, the retardation effects were attributed to the
nature and condition of the surfaces of the FA [406] while Thomas
10. Potential benefits of green concrete in early project [61] attributed it to the low calcium content of FA. Thomas [61]
completion and cost savings also mentioned that concrete setting and invariably concrete
strength development are affected by composition and quantity
According to Hong Kong Design Code, the lowest grade of con- of SCM, type and amount of cement, w/cm ratio (water-
crete for use in reinforced concrete is C20 (20 MPa). For construc- cementitious materials ratio), type and amount of chemical admix-
tion of multi-storey, minimum concrete grade of 25 MPa is often tures and concrete temperature.
required and utilized [393]. For high-rise buildings, HSC are often Furthermore, retardation effects were also reported by some
utilized with concrete strength ranging from 55.1 to 131 MPa authors in concrete and mortars incorporating RHA [23,102]. The
[393,394]. During concrete construction projects, allowance of 28 retardation effects and strength development observed at 3 and
curing days is given for concrete works including columns, slabs 7 days was found to correlate linearly with the total heat released
and beams to develop sufficient strength in compliance with the expressed as volume of available water and limited by calcium
concrete/project design requirements. For high-rise buildings, hydroxide (CH) availability [23]. On the other hand, the coarse nat-
sometimes, up to a year or more is spent before the lower floors ure of the untreated RHA was found to affect the strength develop-
are loaded which delays project completion [395]. This construc- ment of mortar [407]. However, [27] reported that RHA is a
tion delay was also highlighted by Johari et al. [396] who reported promising SCM which retains its reactivity potential and resilience
delay in full loading of many construction works after several despite the effects of calcinations temperature, grinding, chemical
months of casting. pre-treatment and manufacturing process variability.
With early compressive strength development of green con- For WG, retardation is caused by smooth surface of WG parti-
crete which range from 30.58-122 MPa and 29.7–162 MPa for 3 cles which cause weak interface with the glass mortar system
and 7 days of curing as displayed in Table 5, the curing waiting [408], lower rate of hydration, higher effective water-cement ratio
time is significantly reduced. The pozzolanic properties of the and neglible water absorption [409], coarse grain size [410] and
SCM in the green concrete promote early strength development incomplete adhesion between WG and cement paste as well as
which has the potential to facilitate early project completion. Com- excessive cement replacement [47,411].
pared to traditional project construction, the project completion In order to avoid the retardation effects in WGC, finer WG par-
time can be reduced by at least 50% with the use of green concrete ticle sizes <38 lm was recommended by Shao et al. [412], particle
of high early strength such as UHPC, HSC and advanced construc- sizes <0.3 mm was recommended by Shayan and Xu [413] while
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 46.7 56 70.2 RHAC (20% RHA) Slump (45 mm). High strength concrete was obtained using locally available
0 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– 70 RHAC (20%RHA) Slump (20 mm). Reduced chloride-ion penetrability. Grinding time should

K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
54 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
Alaka and Oyedele [131] 0.31 0.62 21.6 32.6 HVFAC (50% FA + 4% SP) concrete requiring abrasion resistance
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 & Met the requirements to be used as UHPC. Reduction of corrosion risk and
GGBS) risk of thermal cracking
Yazıcı et al. [271] 0.21 204–243 Reactive powder concrete (SF & Autoclave curing and steam curing reduced unreacted SCM which improved
GGBS-Autoclaved and steam- compressive strength. High temperature favours strength development of
cured for 2 days) 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 Improvement in fracture energy, modulus of elasticity and ductility
fibre)
Harbec et al. [265] 0.35 54.5 59.8 HPC (10% Glass fibre replacement Produced comparable strength to SF. Glass fibre fume (GF) reduced ASR
of cement) 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

1085
(continued on next page)
1086 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095

<600 lm particle was advocated by Lee et al. [414]. Also, valoriza-

Improved dispersion by superplasticizer, enhanced particle interlocking and

Did not exhibit ASR because of low w/b ratio. Improved high strength after
tion of WG into fine particles was suggested by Omran and Tagnit-

Steam hot curing at 90 °C for 48 h at 100%RH accelerated the pozzolanic

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].
reactions and facilitated early-strength development

11. Future trends in production and application of green

concrete
normal and steam curing for 2 days

Green concrete can be used in blocks, floor screeding underlays

Promoted shrinkage reduction

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
compressive strength

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
Remarks

and marine structures, industrial floors, pavements and barriers

and future applications are foreseen in infrastructure projects
requiring slender structural members such as skyscrapers. Another
UHPC (70%SF + 30% WG: steam hot

future trend is the utilization of Green UHSC and Green UHPC in

UHPC (70%SF + 30% WG: Normal

CFST composite columns in high-rise buildings and other struc-

UHPC (50% Glass sand + (50%
WG mortar (5%GP + 25% MK)

tures with heavy axial loadings.

Green concrete is also foreseen to be utilized in commercial
production of precast concrete panels, terrazzo tiles, concrete
Type of concrete

masonry blocks and paving stones [420]. Green UHSC is also appli-
Quartz sand)

cable in prestressed and precast concrete members for industrial

and nuclear storage facilities and in combination with steel fibres
curing)

curing)

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].
91 days); 196 (Steam
171 (Normal curing-

UHPFRC made with silica sand (500 lm maximum size), GGBFS

and steel fibres (3% and 13 mm length) can also be used to
curing-2 days)

strengthen existing RC beams [422].

234 (2 days)

LWC is increasingly utilized in residential and office buildings to

achieve reduced load, improved heat and sound adsorption in par-
175
28

titions and wall [423]. LWC reinforced with polymer fibres can be
utilized in sidewalk concrete slabs, in bridge elements such as
14
44

decks, girders, piers, parking garages as well as offshore platforms,

thermal and acoustic insulating lightweight screeds above struc-
tural floors [317,424,425].
125
7
CS (MPa)

LWAC is also used in high-rise buildings, long span bridges,

buildings with poor foundation construction and floating and off-
34

shore structures as well as external and internal walls, panels, roof-

3

ing decks and floors [322,326]. Optimized lightweight UHPC-HSS

can also be utilized in deck panels of movable bridge [426].
W/C

0.24

0.24

Yun-Ming et al. [427] reported the use of clay-based GP in form

of geopolymer binders and pyraments in precast and prestressed
W/SCM

concrete, building thermal insulation, foundry, production of high

0.19

0.19

quality ceramic tiles and bricks, aircraft composites and cabin inte-
riors and lightweight concrete.
Geopolymers can also be used in the solidification and immobi-
Soliman and Tagnit-Hamou

Soliman and Tagnit-Hamou

Soliman and Tagnit-Hamou

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-
Harbi et al. [450]

magnetic transparency and sustainability are required. MK-based

Table 5 (continued)

GP direct coating of reinforcements in aggressive marine environ-

ments was recommended because it exhibited low permeability,
Author(s)

[401]

[401]

[402]

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.
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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.
1087
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.
1088 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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.
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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. Živica, 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.
1089
[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. Tošić, S. Marinković, T. Dašić, M. Stanić, 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.
1090 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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.
_ Tohumcu, Effects of different curing regimes on the compressive
[158] A.F. Bingöl, I.
strength properties of self compacting concrete incorporating fly ash and
silica fume, Mater. Des. 51 (2013) 12–18.
[159] M. Gesoğlu, 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. Řezník, 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.
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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. Boğa, 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.
1091
[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. Boğa, 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.
1092 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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. Yiğiter, 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. Vaitkevičius, 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.
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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. Uygunoğlu, 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. Daněk, 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. Demirboğa, R. Gül, Production of high strength concrete by use of
industrial by-products, Build. Environ. 41 (8) (2006) 1124–1127.
1093
[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. Erdoğdu, 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.
1094 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
[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. Brouček, E. Novotná, Z. Keršner, D. Lehký, 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. Szymański, 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
 K.M. Liew et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 1063–1095
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).
1095
[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.