Decision-making framework for sustainable concrete incorporating multiple waste-derived material replacements: an MCDM approach

Q2 Engineering
Subhalaxmi Khumukcham, Khushpreet Singh, Mrinal Kanti Sen
{"title":"Decision-making framework for sustainable concrete incorporating multiple waste-derived material replacements: an MCDM approach","authors":"Subhalaxmi Khumukcham,&nbsp;Khushpreet Singh,&nbsp;Mrinal Kanti Sen","doi":"10.1007/s42107-026-01716-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sustainable alternatives that comprise lowering the consumption of resources without sacrificing structural performance. With the production of normal concrete, the environmental burden is increasing day by day. Sustainable M30-grade concrete can be developed by using various waste materials from industry, agriculture, and plastics. In this study, methodical experimental investigations are conducted on partial replacement of cement fine aggregate and coarse aggregate using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tool. MCDM is integrated for the simultaneous evaluation of compressive strength for the optimisation of the concrete mixes. Eight sustainable concrete models (M1 to M8) were developed in addition to a traditional control mix (M0). For the development of eight sustainable concrete models, a logical framework for material selection based on correlation analysis and the Best-Worst Method (BWM) for weightage determination has been used. Compressive strength testing has been used to evaluate the suggested mixes after 28 days, and unit weight and material cost were compared. The findings show that replacement systems based on minerals performed better than dominant mixes based on polymers and biomaterials. The Model M1 achieved the highest compressive strength, 41.48 N/mm², followed by M2 with 40.92 N/mm² and M3 with 39.43 N/mm²compressive strength. The models M1, M2, and M3 outperformed the control mix in compressive strength, weight reduction, and cost effectiveness. While Models M6-M8 demonstrated relatively lower strength and higher weight due to the extensive use of lightweight aggregates, Models M4 and M5 demonstrated intermediate performance because of the inclusion of polymeric and elastomeric materials. Models M1 to M3 are determined to be the most structurally and financially ideal sustainable mixes through a multi-criteria trade-off analysis that integrated strength, weight, and cost.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8513,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Civil Engineering","volume":"27 8","pages":"3893 - 3910"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Civil Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42107-026-01716-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sustainable alternatives that comprise lowering the consumption of resources without sacrificing structural performance. With the production of normal concrete, the environmental burden is increasing day by day. Sustainable M30-grade concrete can be developed by using various waste materials from industry, agriculture, and plastics. In this study, methodical experimental investigations are conducted on partial replacement of cement fine aggregate and coarse aggregate using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tool. MCDM is integrated for the simultaneous evaluation of compressive strength for the optimisation of the concrete mixes. Eight sustainable concrete models (M1 to M8) were developed in addition to a traditional control mix (M0). For the development of eight sustainable concrete models, a logical framework for material selection based on correlation analysis and the Best-Worst Method (BWM) for weightage determination has been used. Compressive strength testing has been used to evaluate the suggested mixes after 28 days, and unit weight and material cost were compared. The findings show that replacement systems based on minerals performed better than dominant mixes based on polymers and biomaterials. The Model M1 achieved the highest compressive strength, 41.48 N/mm², followed by M2 with 40.92 N/mm² and M3 with 39.43 N/mm²compressive strength. The models M1, M2, and M3 outperformed the control mix in compressive strength, weight reduction, and cost effectiveness. While Models M6-M8 demonstrated relatively lower strength and higher weight due to the extensive use of lightweight aggregates, Models M4 and M5 demonstrated intermediate performance because of the inclusion of polymeric and elastomeric materials. Models M1 to M3 are determined to be the most structurally and financially ideal sustainable mixes through a multi-criteria trade-off analysis that integrated strength, weight, and cost.

Abstract Image

包含多种废物衍生材料替代的可持续混凝土决策框架:MCDM方法
可持续的替代方案,包括在不牺牲结构性能的情况下降低资源消耗。随着普通混凝土的生产,环境负担日益加重。可持续的m30级混凝土可以通过使用来自工业、农业和塑料的各种废料来开发。在本研究中,采用多准则决策(MCDM)工具对水泥细骨料和粗骨料的部分替代进行了系统的实验研究。MCDM集成于同时评估抗压强度以优化混凝土混合料。除了传统的控制组合(M0)外,还开发了8种可持续混凝土模型(M1至M8)。为了开发八个可持续混凝土模型,采用了基于相关分析的材料选择逻辑框架和确定权重的最佳-最差方法(Best-Worst Method, BWM)。采用抗压强度试验对建议的混合料进行了28天后的评价,并对单位重量和材料成本进行了比较。研究结果表明,基于矿物的替代系统比基于聚合物和生物材料的主流混合物表现更好。M1型抗压强度最高,为41.48 N/mm²,其次是M2型,为40.92 N/mm²,M3型为39.43 N/mm²。型号M1、M2和M3在抗压强度、减重和成本效益方面优于对照组合。由于大量使用轻质骨料,型号M6-M8表现出相对较低的强度和较高的重量,型号M4和M5表现出中等的性能,因为包含聚合物和弹性体材料。通过综合强度、重量和成本的多标准权衡分析,确定M1到M3型号是结构上和财务上最理想的可持续组合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering Engineering-Civil and Structural Engineering
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing) welcomes articles and research contributions on topics such as:- Structural analysis and design - Earthquake and structural engineering - New building materials and concrete technology - Sustainable building and energy conservation - Housing and planning - Construction management - Optimal design of structuresPlease note that the journal will not accept papers in the area of hydraulic or geotechnical engineering, traffic/transportation or road making engineering, and on materials relevant to non-structural buildings, e.g. materials for road making and asphalt.  Although the journal will publish authoritative papers on theoretical and experimental research works and advanced applications, it may also feature, when appropriate:  a) tutorial survey type papers reviewing some fields of civil engineering; b) short communications and research notes; c) book reviews and conference announcements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书