Bai Zhang , Hong Zhu , Zhiyuan Yang , Yao-Rong Dong
{"title":"BFRP bars reinforced geopolymer-based coral aggregate concrete beams with sustainable and high seawater erosion resistance: Flexural durability, economic, and ecological analysis","authors":"Bai Zhang , Hong Zhu , Zhiyuan Yang , Yao-Rong Dong","doi":"10.1016/j.engstruct.2025.119910","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cement-based coral aggregate concrete (CAC) and its structures suffer from high carbon emissions, poor resistance to permeation, and inadequate durability under hygrothermal marine environments. To overcome these drawbacks, this study employed slag-fly ash-based geopolymers as alternatives to ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars as reinforcements for developing innovative BFRP bars reinforced geopolymer-based CAC (GPCAC) beams. Through the accelerated aging method in laboratory, the flexural durability and deterioration mechanism of cement-based CAC beams and GPCAC beams under seawater wet-dry cycling conditions were comparatively analyzed. The results revealed that the number of cracks in GPCAC and CAC beams at the time of damage decreased, while the crack spacing and width increased after exposure to seawater corrosive environments. Additionally, an increase in the initial flexural stiffness of both GPCAC and CAC beams was observed after exposure to seawater wet-dry cyclic environments, but this increased stiffness did not translate into an enhanced ultimate loading capacity. Conversely, both GPCAC and CAC beams showed varying degrees of degradation in ultimate loading capacity and deflection values with increasing exposure time and temperatures. Moreover, GPCAC beams featured outstanding resistance to seawater attacks than CAC beams. After 12 months of seawater wetting-drying cycles at 60 °C, the flexural capacity of CAC beams deteriorated by approximately 25 %, whereas that of GPCAC beams only diminished by approximately 16 %. Furthermore, GPCAC beams boasted a lower carbon footprint and energy emission than CAC beams. In comparison to cement-based CAC beams, the energy consumptions and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of GPCAC beams were reduced by 21.9 % and 35.0 %, respectively.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11763,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Structures","volume":"330 ","pages":"Article 119910"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering Structures","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141029625003001","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cement-based coral aggregate concrete (CAC) and its structures suffer from high carbon emissions, poor resistance to permeation, and inadequate durability under hygrothermal marine environments. To overcome these drawbacks, this study employed slag-fly ash-based geopolymers as alternatives to ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars as reinforcements for developing innovative BFRP bars reinforced geopolymer-based CAC (GPCAC) beams. Through the accelerated aging method in laboratory, the flexural durability and deterioration mechanism of cement-based CAC beams and GPCAC beams under seawater wet-dry cycling conditions were comparatively analyzed. The results revealed that the number of cracks in GPCAC and CAC beams at the time of damage decreased, while the crack spacing and width increased after exposure to seawater corrosive environments. Additionally, an increase in the initial flexural stiffness of both GPCAC and CAC beams was observed after exposure to seawater wet-dry cyclic environments, but this increased stiffness did not translate into an enhanced ultimate loading capacity. Conversely, both GPCAC and CAC beams showed varying degrees of degradation in ultimate loading capacity and deflection values with increasing exposure time and temperatures. Moreover, GPCAC beams featured outstanding resistance to seawater attacks than CAC beams. After 12 months of seawater wetting-drying cycles at 60 °C, the flexural capacity of CAC beams deteriorated by approximately 25 %, whereas that of GPCAC beams only diminished by approximately 16 %. Furthermore, GPCAC beams boasted a lower carbon footprint and energy emission than CAC beams. In comparison to cement-based CAC beams, the energy consumptions and CO2 emissions of GPCAC beams were reduced by 21.9 % and 35.0 %, respectively.
期刊介绍:
Engineering Structures provides a forum for a broad blend of scientific and technical papers to reflect the evolving needs of the structural engineering and structural mechanics communities. Particularly welcome are contributions dealing with applications of structural engineering and mechanics principles in all areas of technology. The journal aspires to a broad and integrated coverage of the effects of dynamic loadings and of the modelling techniques whereby the structural response to these loadings may be computed.
The scope of Engineering Structures encompasses, but is not restricted to, the following areas: infrastructure engineering; earthquake engineering; structure-fluid-soil interaction; wind engineering; fire engineering; blast engineering; structural reliability/stability; life assessment/integrity; structural health monitoring; multi-hazard engineering; structural dynamics; optimization; expert systems; experimental modelling; performance-based design; multiscale analysis; value engineering.
Topics of interest include: tall buildings; innovative structures; environmentally responsive structures; bridges; stadiums; commercial and public buildings; transmission towers; television and telecommunication masts; foldable structures; cooling towers; plates and shells; suspension structures; protective structures; smart structures; nuclear reactors; dams; pressure vessels; pipelines; tunnels.
Engineering Structures also publishes review articles, short communications and discussions, book reviews, and a diary on international events related to any aspect of structural engineering.