TY - JOUR
T1 - Life-cycle assessment of strengthening pre-stressed normal-strength concrete beams with different steel-fibered concrete layers
AU - Pushkar, Svetlana
AU - Ribakov, Yuri
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - This study aimed to determine the difference between two alternatives for pre-stressed normal-strength concrete beams according to life-cycle assessments (LCAs): strengthening the PNSC (pre-stressed normal-strength concrete) beam on one side with a 70 mm width, steel-fibered, high-strength concrete layer (Case 1) and strengthening the PNSC beams by jacketing on three sides with 30 mm width, ultra-high-performance, fiber-reinforced concrete layers (Case 2). We conducted LCAs of these cases using the ReCiPe2016 midpoint and endpoint-single-score methods. The differences among the beams’ endpoint-single-score results were evaluated using a two-stage nested analysis of variance. The ReCiPe2016 midpoint results showed that compared to Case 2, Case 1 reduced the global warming potential, terrestrial ecotoxicity, water consumption, and fossil-resource-scarcity impacts by 73–80%. The ReCiPe2016 endpoint-single-score results showed that the environmental damage from Case 1 was significantly lower (p = 0.0003) than that from Case 2. These findings could be promising and useful for studying sustainability in construction.
AB - This study aimed to determine the difference between two alternatives for pre-stressed normal-strength concrete beams according to life-cycle assessments (LCAs): strengthening the PNSC (pre-stressed normal-strength concrete) beam on one side with a 70 mm width, steel-fibered, high-strength concrete layer (Case 1) and strengthening the PNSC beams by jacketing on three sides with 30 mm width, ultra-high-performance, fiber-reinforced concrete layers (Case 2). We conducted LCAs of these cases using the ReCiPe2016 midpoint and endpoint-single-score methods. The differences among the beams’ endpoint-single-score results were evaluated using a two-stage nested analysis of variance. The ReCiPe2016 midpoint results showed that compared to Case 2, Case 1 reduced the global warming potential, terrestrial ecotoxicity, water consumption, and fossil-resource-scarcity impacts by 73–80%. The ReCiPe2016 endpoint-single-score results showed that the environmental damage from Case 1 was significantly lower (p = 0.0003) than that from Case 2. These findings could be promising and useful for studying sustainability in construction.
KW - Composite beam
KW - Life-cycle assessment
KW - Pre-stressed normal-strength concrete
KW - Steel-fibered high-strength concrete
KW - Ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093070152&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/su12197958
DO - 10.3390/su12197958
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85093070152
SN - 2071-1050
VL - 12
SP - 1
EP - 15
JO - Sustainability (Switzerland)
JF - Sustainability (Switzerland)
IS - 19
M1 - 7958
ER -