the role of concrete compressive strength on the service
TRANSCRIPT
Accepted Manuscript
The role of concrete compressive strength on the service life and life cycle of a RCstructure: Case study
Mônica Regina Garcez, Abrahão Bernardo Rohden, Luis Gabriel G. Godoy
PII: S0959-6526(17)32460-5
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.153
Reference: JCLP 10945
To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production
Received Date: 14 June 2017
Revised Date: 13 October 2017
Accepted Date: 13 October 2017
Please cite this article as: Garcez MôRegina, Rohden AbrahãBernardo, Godoy LGG, The role ofconcrete compressive strength on the service life and life cycle of a RC structure: Case study, Journal ofCleaner Production (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.153.
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service toour customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergocopyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Pleasenote that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and alllegal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
MANUSCRIP
T
ACCEPTED
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The role of concrete compressive strength on the service life and life cycle of a RC structure: case study
Mônica Regina Garceza, Abrahão Bernardo Rohdenb, Luis Gabriel G. Godoyb
a Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Interdisciplinary Department, km 92, RS-030, 11.700, Tramandaí - RS, Brazil, 95590-000, [email protected]. Corresponding author.
b Regional University of Blumenau, Environmental Engineering Post-Graduation Program, São Paulo, 3250, Itoupava Seca, Blumenau – SC, Brazil, 89030-000.
Abstract
This paper aims to investigate if the concrete compressive strength could be used as an environmental strategy to increase the sustainability potential of a given RC structure. The main goal is to evaluate if increasing design concrete compressive strength would result a better balance between the amounts of steel and concrete, leading to a decrease of environmental impacts and construction costs, followed by an increase in RC structure service life and/or durability. The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been used to quantify environmental impacts and embodied energy of three four-pavement commercial office-building designed with C25, C50, and C75 concrete. Service life has been assessed based on design criteria for durability. Results show that for the studied functional unit RC50 presents better results from the environmental and economical point of view. Despite the positive effects regarding durability, the impacts during material production, construction, and demolition proved that, for this case study, the use of RC75 is not economically nor environmentally advantageous when compared to RC50. This study is an evidence that materials choice and structural design parameters are extremely relevant with regard to the environmental impact and service life of reinforced concrete buildings. Results highlight the importance of the inventory data collection on the life cycle analysis.
Keywords environmental impact, waffle slab system, construction costs, structural design, materials choice.
1 Introduction
Building and construction sector accounts for approximately 40% of annual energy consumption (IPCC, 2007). The sector is responsible for about 40% of global resource use, including 12% of all fresh-water, employs more than 10% of the workforce, and produces up to 40% of the solid waste worldwide (UNEP, 2012). Additionally, it is a major contributor for CO2 emissions, accounting for up to 30% of all energy-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (UNEP, 2007; Habert & Roussel, 2009; Ali et al., 2011; Purnell, 2012). The production of concrete, for instance, emits a large amount of CO2 from the material production to the manufacturing stage (Xing et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2013; Silva et al., 2013), mainly due to the cement manufacturing process. In Brazil, according to the Second Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report (MCTI, 2014), 1 ton of cement releases about 0.3 ton of CO2, being responsible for 8.5% of the CO2 emissions due to calcination of raw materials and burning fuels, while steel production is responsible for 28.9% of the CO2 emissions considering industrial process and energy sectors. Despite being 100% recyclable, the remelting steel process involves significant energy use (∼10 - 20MJ/kg), according to Purnell (2012). Nevertheless,
