1. Introduction
The quality, appropriate use, and environmental impact of recycled materials present a difficult situation in the construction business today. In order to produce high-quality concrete, which can have aggregate compositions of up to three-fourths of the volume of the concrete, the construction industry needs a vast amount of natural resources due to increased urbanization [
1]. Therefore, alternative materials from construction and demolition (C&D) waste and less-used natural resources can be used in the production of concrete to address the issue of the excessive use of aggregates (fine and coarse). This reduces land waste, lowers the cost of concrete, and conserves valuable natural resources. Currently, employing aggregate recycled from concrete and construction is the most promising choice out of a variety of options. In this study, less-utilized natural resources such as aeolian sand (AS) from deserts were selected.
In an effort to increase the longevity of concrete constructions, self-compacting concrete (SCC) was introduced in 1988 [
2]. Subsequently, SCC has had significant growth and has had a significant impact on civil engineering, being applied to a wide range of construction projects worldwide, including office buildings, tunnels in Japan, highway bridges in Sweden, and useful structures in China, the United States, the Netherlands, and Thailand [
3,
4,
5]. Recycled coarse aggregate self-compacting concrete (RCASCC), which combines recycled coarse aggregate (RCA) with SCC, has been the subject of extensive research due to the growing awareness of human impact on the environment. The most common replacement ratios are 25%, 50%, and 75% [
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12]. Therefore, the use of RCASCC is both technically feasible and justified; nevertheless, care must be taken to ensure that the performance characteristics of this type of concrete are adequate to meet the requirements of each individual situation [
13].
Globally available aeolian sand can be converted into a green resource through appropriate processing and use [
14,
15]. Due to the scarcity of natural resources in recent years, a large number of researchers have examined the use of aeolian sand (AS) in concrete globally. Their research primarily focuses on AS as a raw material for concrete, with the expectation that it will eventually serve as the primary fine aggregate in concrete and construction [
16,
17,
18,
19]. There are two primary results on AS replacement: (1) there exists an ideal ratio for AS replacement [
20,
21,
22], and (2) the use of AS alone has adverse impacts on the characteristics of concrete and construction [
15,
17,
23]. Consequently, research on local deserts is required, and the use of AS in concrete is both technically feasible and warranted.
Numerous studies have been conducted on the mechanical and durability characteristics of aeolian sand concrete, RCASCC, and recycled aggregate concrete. Trends in the durability characteristics of concrete made with RCA and AS [
24] have been documented in the literature. These characteristics include water permeability [
25,
26], resistance to chloride penetration [
27,
28], sulfate attack [
29,
30], and freeze–thaw resistance [
31,
32,
33]. In conclusion, SCC allows for the addition of AS and RCA.
Thus, this study’s goal is to lower building costs and reinforce the idea of sustainability by employing recycled coarse aggregates and fine materials such as AS. Furthermore, it examines and emphasizes how replacing these materials affects water permeability and the long-term effectiveness of ARSCC in sulfate settings.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.1.1. Binder, Admixtures, and Water
Fly ash from the Xinjiang Zhongtian Yintai firm and PO42.5 Portland cement, which complies with the standard, were utilized as binders in all concrete combinations during the production process. The specific gravity and specific surface area of Portland cement are 354 m
2/kg. The cubic concrete specimens prepared for this study had a strength rating of C30.
Table 1 lists the characteristic features of Portland cement, and
Table 2 lists the fly ash’s performance.
The fresh concrete was made sufficiently workable, and the water–binder ratio was lowered by using a water reducer with a water reduction rate of roughly 25–30%. The water utilized in this study is from Urumqi, where water is typically sourced from to make concrete.
2.1.2. Fine Aggregate
To make ARSCC, aeolian sand was extracted from the Gurbantungut Desert in northern Xinjiang. The ARSCC’s performance is greatly impacted by the characteristics of aeolian sand. This study’s fine aggregate’s fundamental physical characteristics are displayed in
Table 3.
Figure 1 shows the fine aggregate particle size distributions obtained via sieve analysis.
2.1.3. Coarse Aggregate
Recycled concrete aggregates were derived from Urumqi’s concrete waste. The research generally agrees that there is less mortar adhered to coarse recycled aggregate than fine recycled aggregate [
34,
35]. This results in the RCA having a greater quality than the fine fraction of recycled aggregate, and in this sense, it makes sense to improve the quality of a material that is relatively better than a lower-quality material [
36]. According to this study, the proportion of aggregate retained between 2.36 and 19 mm sieves is known as the RCA.
Table 4 displays the fundamental physical characteristics of the coarse aggregate employed in this investigation.
Figure 2 shows the coarse aggregate particle size distributions obtained via sieve analysis.
2.2. Sample Preparation
Table 5 displays the proportions of the mixture. While mass substitution was chosen for engineering applications and ease of calculation because the density difference between NS and AS is only 54.9 kg/m
3, volume substitution was chosen to preserve the stability of the concrete’s constituent parts after substitution and the substitution rate. The AS replacement ratios of 0%, 20%, 40%, and 60% by mass are represented by A0, A20, A40, and S60; the RCA replacement ratios of 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% by volume are represented by R0, R25, R50, and R75. Water-to-binder (W/B) ratio was 0.33. Prior to molding, the experimental mixes including the different AS and RCA replacement ratios underwent a workability test, as indicated in
Table 6. The specimens were poured, left for 24 h, and then cured for 28 days at 20 °C and 95% relative humidity under conventional curing conditions before being demold. To obtain the average value, each test sample was measured three times per group.
2.3. Workability Tests
As seen in
Figure 3, the workability test of fresh ARSCC was carried out in compliance with specifications. Three common behaviors were shown on the workability test: segregation, passing, and filling abilities. In slump flow experiments, the viscosity and flowability of the new mix were evaluated by measuring the slump flow diameter. The segregation of fresh ARSCC was assessed using segregation resistance, and the passage ability was assessed using the J-ring test.
2.4. Compressive Strength Tests
After 28 days of curing, compressive strength tests were performed on all ARSCC mixes in compliance with the standard. Cube specimens measuring 150 mm × 150 mm × 150 mm and 100 mm × 100 mm × 100 mm were prepared for the tests.
2.5. Resistance Water and Chloride Penetration Tests
Hard ARSCC’s resistance to chloride penetration was determined with coulomb electric flux tests, and its resistance to water penetration was determined with progressive pressure loading tests using standard procedures. Furthermore, the dimensions of the test components are as follows: for water penetration testing, the round table body was Ø 175 mm × Ø 185 mm × 150 mm, and for electric flux tests, the cylinder measured Ø 100 mm × 50 mm.
2.5.1. Gradual Pressure Loading Tests
For four of the six examples in each group, the maximum seepage pressure multiplied by 10 yielded the grade of seepage resistance of the concrete in the absence of seepage. The formula for calculating the seepage resistance grade of concrete is P = 10H − 1, where P represents the impermeability grade and H denotes the seepage pressure (MPa) at which three out of the six specimens experience seepage.
2.5.2. Electric Flux Tests
NaCl solution with a mass concentration of 3% and NaOH solution with a molar concentration of 0.3 mol/L were simultaneously injected into both sides of the test tank to provide access to 60 V direct current after the specimen was placed into the specimen tank to verify the device’s sealing. The initial current reading, I0, was recorded with the positive electrode on the NaOH side and the negative electrode on the NaCl side. As seen in
Figure 4, the current value was collected both during and after the test, and it remained active for six hours.
2.6. Resistance to Sulfate Attack Tests
Hard ARSCC tests were used to determine how resistant the concrete was to sulfate attacks using established methods. The specimens in this study were totally submerged in a 5% Na
2SO
4 solution for 15 h, followed by 6 h of drying as part of a 22 h drying–wetting process using HC-LSB concrete sulfate dry–wet cycle testing equipment (
Figure 5). For 120 days, there were cycles of drying and soaking. The test pieces were designed as cube specimens (100 mm × 100 mm × 100 mm) for compressive strength and prism specimens (100 mm × 100 mm × 400 mm) for mass and elasticity variation.
2.6.1. Mass Variation
With an accuracy of 0.1 g, the mass variations in the specimens under various dry–wet cycles were measured using an electronic balance. After the specimens were dried for 48 h at 45 °C in an oven, the mass was measured. The formula Dmi = (mi − m0) 100%/m0, where m0 is the starting mass and mi is the mass after N of the dry and wet cycle, can be used to calculate the mass change Dm.
2.6.2. Relative Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity
Using a nonmetallic ultrasonic testing analyzer, the concrete’s dynamic modulus of elasticity was determined. The sound velocity of the initial peak value of an ultrasonic wave traveling through the specimens was measured with the instrument, and the sound speed was translated into the concrete’s dynamic elastic modulus. Equations (1) and (2) provide an illustration of the precise formula:
where P
i is the relative dynamic elastic modulus of the i th concrete sample after N dry and wet cycles;
is the transverse fundamental frequency of the i th concrete test block after N dry and wet cycles;
is the initial value of transverse fundamental frequency of the i th concrete sample after N dry and wet cycles; and P is the relative dynamic elastic modulus of a group of concrete sample after N dry and wet cycles.
2.6.3. Corrosion Resistance Factor
The ratio of the compressive strength of concrete specimens subjected to sulfate dry–wet cycle erosion to the compressive strength of the concrete specimens subjected to ordinary curing is known as the corrosion resistance factor [
37]. Equation (3) provides an illustration of the exact formula:
where
is the corrosion resistance factor (%);
is the compressive strength of a group of concrete specimens after N wet and dry sulfate cycles; and
is the compressive strength of a group of concrete specimens under standard curing.
2.7. X-ray Diffraction (XRD)
An X-ray diffractometer (Bruker D8 advance) was utilized to assess the substances’ composition and content. Samples of cement mortar without gravel were chosen from the same group of sample fragments and crushed, mixed evenly, and filtered using a 300 mesh screen after the compressive strength test was finished. In the end, 1 g of each sample group was extracted for the X-ray diffraction (XRD) test. Following the test, all of the XRD samples were extracted from the pieces and pulverized in an agate mortar. The data files that were collected were then processed using MDI Jade, and graphs were created. XRD was carried out in the 2θ range of 10–75° at a scanning speed of 2°/min in the 2θ range of.
2.8. Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry (MIP)
An AutoPore Iv 9510 from American Micromeritics was utilized to perform mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) testing, which measures the changes in pore structure characteristics caused by sulfate assault. The pressure range tested was 0.2 MPa to 415 MPa. By chopping the concrete into roughly 1 cm3 cubes and drying it in the same conditions as the XRD experiments, the concrete samples for the MIP were taken from the surface of concrete cylinder specimens.