Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 00 (2020) 0000–0000 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ITCSD2020

Carbon nano-Concrete: A Performance Analysis Study

Mainak Ghosala,b,c,d,Arun Kumar Chakrabortyd 1
aPhD Scholar,Indian Institute of Engineering Science & Technology(IIEST),Shibpur,Howrah-711103,India
bEx- Asst. Engineer, West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.,31,Black Burn Lane,Kolkata-12,India
cJt. Secretary, Coal Ash Institute of India, Dumdum, Kolkata-30, India
dAssistant Professor, Ideal Institute of Engineering, Kalyani-741235,India
dAssociate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIEST,Shibpur, Howrah-711103,India

Abstract

With the population expanding earth’s limited resources have to be spread thin to meet our society’s demand for sustainable
development. In the last two decades, research on the study and manipulation of matter at the nanoscale has been expanding
exponentially, supported by the advances achieved due the emergence of new generation admixtures aided by advancement of
visual technologies. Nanomaterials especially carbon based nanomaterials like single-walled or multi-walled carbon nanotubes
(SWNT/MWNT) which have been successfully synthesized from waste materials offer very smart solutions starting from
structural health monitoring to improved properties to cement-concrete microstructural system, leading to more hydration
products vis-à-vis strength and carbon nanofibers (CNF) are considered a much cheaper nanomaterial than CNTs. Major
developments in cement-concrete performance were attained with application of super-fine particles viz. flyash, silica fume and
now nanomaterials thus alleviating the problem of scarcity in natural materials and reducing green-house gas (GHG) emissions.
This due to the fact that nanomaterials can be used to minimise waste generation due to its recyclability in concrete and
nanomaterial-driven pollution control strategies are rapidly emerging as a small, but powerful source of solutions for today’s
environmental problems. However, to achieve results on optimized solutions, it is prudent to go for ‘Performance Based’
approach of these smart materials as against the common prescriptive approach for conventional materials in concrete.
Mortar specimens were prepared as per IS: 4031, at a water to cement ratio (w/c) of 0.40 and natural river sand used according to
IS: 383, at a sand to cement ratio (s/c) of 3.0 with water as per the stipulated standard consistency formula. Our study focused on
finding the compressive strength of cement composites reinforced with optimized MWCNTs @ various ages and using the 28
day optimum % b.w.c, in a M-40 Grade standard concrete prepared as per IS:10262, keeping the w/c ratio fixed at 0.4. As cement
hydration continues for years, it is observed that as the proportion of added MWCNTs was increased from 0% to 0.1% b.w.c, the
mechanical strength of the cement composites correspondingly improved from 28 days to 1 year. The bulk density along with the
mechanical and durability properties for M-40 grade carbon nano-concrete in diverse mediums like air to MgCl2 and MgSO4
exposure showed vast improvements over normal M-40 grade control concrete. Characterization properties like Scanning
Electron Microscopy suggest that nanotube additions have effected a massive property change along with improved micro
structural property changes.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd International Conference on
Innovative Technologies for Clean and Sustainable Development.

Keywords: Carbon; Cement; Concrete; Nanomaterials; Sustainable

1. Introduction
Concrete is the most consumed building material in earth consisting of cement and other raw materials at the
macro level. With the cement production capacity of India likely to cross 600 million tonnes by 2030 and
considering the burden on the natural resources, unfavourable environmental impacts would be on rise. Keeping in
mind the Sustainability Development Goals (SDG) and also with the possibility of future carbon tax

* Mainak Ghosal. Tel.: +91-09433624405; fax: +91-03473234165.

E-mail address: [email protected]
2214-7853 © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd International Conference on
Innovative Technologies for Clean and Sustainable Development.
implementation, it’s high time we implement new technologies like nanotechnology in cement concrete.
Nanomaterials offer a promising approach because they have a large surface-area-to-volume ratio for interacting
with CO2 for CO2 harvesting to help slow the climate-changing rise in atmospheric CO2[11] levels and properties
that reports increase of up to 146% in the compressive and 79.5% in the flexural strength of concrete [1].
Researchers have tried everything from ‘micro’ to ‘nano’ but, when we consider Micro or Nano materials in
concrete, their perception takes time. Micro-materials have been widely used in construction during the last ten
years but application of nanomaterials in concrete is in a nascent stage and has been mainly confined to two areas,
namely coatings and fabrications. With nano coatings market proposed to be saturated in a few years’ time its time
now to look up to the fabrication area which has the potential of providing a durable, innovative and green concrete,
thus promoting sustainability in construction. All this leads to a new concrete whose behaviour may be interestingly
novel w.r.to improved properties like increased bulk density/compressive strengths and durability called,
‘Nano’concrete.
a b

Fig.1. (a) CNFs used in repair in Rabindra Bharati University’s Ramanujam Building, Kolkata; (b) Difference of old surface & repaired surface

Identified breakthroughs in nano-carbon fabrications include - globally in Edencrete’s Colorado’s Spillways/

Georgia’s Highways [2] or locally in the recently repaired Rabindra Bharati University’s Ramanujam Building,
Kolkata B.T.Road campus, as shown in Fig.1, though the University authorities were reluctant to admit explicitly,
about their building being nano-enabled

2. Experimental Programme
The materials used were cement-OPC(43 Grade),Fine Aggregate(FA)-River sand conforming to Zone II of
IS:383 - 1970, Coarse Aggregate(CA)- Pakur variety(20mm nominal size), Potable water,
Admixture(Superplasticizer)- Polycarboxylate Ether and Nano Materials like Carbon Nanotubes. The following
Table 1 below shows the specific properties of carbon nanotubes used here.

Table 1: Specific Properties of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes Used

Item Description

Diameter 20-40 nm
Length 25-45 nm
Purity 80-85%(as per Raman Spectrometer & SEM analysis)
Amorphous Carbon 5-8%
Residue (Calcination In Air) 5-6% by wt.
Average Interlayer Distance 0.34nm
Specific Surface Area 90-220m2/g
Bulk Density 0.07-0.32gm/cc
Real Density 1-8 gm/cc
Volume Resistivity 0.1-0.15 ohm.cm(measured at pressure in powder)

2.1 Tests on Cement Mortar Composites

Mortar Cubes of 70.7mmx70.7mmx70.7mm size were casted as per the Indian Standards. Carbon
Nanotubes were added in proportions as per literature review i.e., 0.02%, 0.05% & 0.1% w.r.to cement wt. after
proper dissolutions in a suitable Superplasticizer (Poly Carboxylate Ether) as shown in Fig.2(especially for CNTs as
they were insoluble in water) keeping the w/c ratio fixed at 0.4.The cubes were then ordinary cured under water and
tested at 7 days, 28 days, 90 days, 180 days & 365 days. The optimized proportions of the nanomaterials were which
gave maximum strength at 28 days. These optimizations were repeated for performing strength & durability tests in
concrete.

2.2 Tests on Concrete Composites

For Compressive strength testing, concrete cubes of 100mmx100mmx100mm size were casted with
cement, FA, CA & water in proportions as per the mix design followed by Indian Standards for M-40 Grade
concrete for 100 mm slump keeping the w/c=0.4.The mix proportions were cement=400Kg/m3,CA=1293.04 Kg/m3
[CA1(90%)=1163.74 Kg/m3;CA2(10%)=129.3 Kg/m3],FA=687.54 Kg/m3,water=157 Kg/m3.Nano Silica & Carbon
Nanotubes were added in optimized proportions as obtained in result (2.1). The cubes were then ordinary cured
under water in a curing tank, at a constant temperature of 27+ 2°C and tested for compressive strength at 28 days
and then immersed under MgCl2 and MgSO4 solutions for strength testing at 90 days 180 days and 365 days
respectively. The MgCl2 and MgSO4 solutions were prepared by dissolving 1 mole of MgCl2(95.21gm) and 120gms
of anhydrous MgSO4 or 246gms of hydrated MgSO4.7H2O in 1 litre of water to get a 1M solution.
Test Data
 A) Sp.Gravity of Cement = 3.08(as Lab. Experiment suggests).
 B) Chemical Admixture = Superplasticizer (Polycarboxylate Ether).
 C) Sp.Gravity of (i)CA (for 20mm =2.831 & for 12.5mm=2.845)
 So, Avg. Specific Gravity of CA = 0.9x2.845 + 0.1x2.831 = 2.8436
 (ii)FA (River Sand confirming to Zone II) =2.688
 D) Water Absorption (i) CA =3.09(ii) FA=Nil.
 E) Free Surface Moisture (i) CA = 1.716(ii) FA= 0.3
 F) Sieve Analysis Results of Fine Aggregates conformed to Zone II of IS: 383
 G) Sieve Analysis Results of Coarse Aggregates conformed to 90% for 12.5mm passing & 10% for 20mm
passing.

3. Test Results and Discussion

Table 2: Strength (MPa) of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) Composites (% Increase w.r.t. 0% additions) for ordinary curing under water
% Carbon 7 day results 28 day results 90 day results 180 day results 365 day results
Nanotubes
additions Bulk Compres Bulk Compres Bulk Comp Bulk Compres Bulk Compres
b.w.c in Density sive Density sive Den ressiv Densit sive Den sive
(OPC) (Kg/m3) Strength (Kg/m3 Strength sity e y Strength sity Strength
(% (N/mm2 ) (N/mm2) (Kg/ Streng (Kg/m (N/mm2) (Kg/ (N/mm2)
increase) ) (% (% m 3) th 3) (% m 3) (%
(% increase increas (% (N/m (% increas (% increas
increas ) e) incre m2 ) increas e) incre e)
e) ase) (% e) ase)
incre
ase)
OPC 2264.08 21.08 2315.4 31.89 2290.12 31.20 2309. 30.01 2229.1 30.01
(0 % CNT) 6 27 0

OPC 2327.21 2356.24 2337.79 35.59 2372. 30.89 2369.0 28.53

17.69 43.75
( 0.02% (2.80%) (- (1.76%) (38.70 (2.08%) (15.48%) 71 (10%) 2 (-4.93%)
CNT) 10.40 %) (2.75 (6.28
(optimized) %)
%) %)

OPC 27.19 34.88

2316.75 2189.20 2306.64 31.85 41.69
(- 2348. 2338.6
(0.05% CNT) (2.33%) (- (37.2% (14.07 38.55 (38.92%)
16.1% (0.72%) 61 8
5.45%) ) %) (3.0%)
) (1.70 (4.92
%) %)

OPC 2301.98 2267.23 24.83 31.50 50.78

21.69 2314.70 2353.4 2364.7
( 0.1% CNT) (1.67%) (- (9.37% (2.08%) 30.16 (69.21%)
(1.07%) 0 6
 (28.9 2.08%) ) (1.91 (23.55% (6.09
%) %) ) %)

a b c d e

Fig.2.(a) CNT Powder; (b)PCE Admixture; (c) Ultrasonicator; (d) CNT dispersion in PCE; (e) Carbon nano-Concrete casting

Table 3: Strength (MPa) of M-40 Grade Concrete (% Increase w.r.t. 0% nano additions) for exposure to Air after 28 days ordinary curing
% Carbon 28 day exposure results 90 day exposure results 180 day exposure results 365 day exposure
Nanotubes results
Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressi Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressiv
additions b.w.c
Density Strength Densit ve Strength Density Strength Density e Strength
in
(Kg/m3) (N/mm )2
y (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3 (N/mm2)
M-40 Grade
(% (% (Kg/m 3 (% (% (% ) (%
Concrete
increase) increase) ) increase) increase) increase) (% increase)
2559.34 43.03 (%
2511.28 49.71 2589.38 48.34 increase
2658.00 40.63
increase )
(0 % CNT)
)

( 0.02% CNT) 2131.28 2666.77 72.37 2667.45 73.67 2680.26* 82.00*

54.58
(optimized) (-16.73%) (26.84%) (6.19%) (45.58%) (3.01%) (52.40%) (0.84%) (101.82%)
*[Test @ *[Test @ 2
2 yr.] yr.]

Table 4: Strength (MPa) of M-40 Grade Concrete (% Increase w.r.t. 0% nano additions) for exposure in MgCl2 soln. after 28 days curing
% Carbon 90 day exposure results 180 day exposure results 365 day exposure results
Nanotubes
additions b.w.c Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressive Strength
in Density Strength Density Strength Density (N/mm2)
(Kg/m3) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (% increase)
M-40 Grade
Concrete (% increase) (% (% increase) (% increase) (% increase)
increase)
2521.87 48.51 2724.66 57.63 2626.75 46.02
(0 % CNT)

( 0.02% CNT) 2698.61 67.78 2692.00 79.73 2722.27* 76.34*

(optimized) (17.71%) (39.72%) (-1.19%) (38.35%) (3.64%) (65.88%)
*[Test @ 2 yr.] *[Test @ 2 yr.]

Table5: Strength (MPa) of M-40 Grade Concrete (% Increase w.r.t. 0% nano additions) for exposure in MgSO4 soln. after 28 days curing
% Carbon 90 day exposure results 180 day exposure results 365 day exposure results
Nanotubes
additions b.w.c Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressive Bulk Compressive Strength
in Density Strength Density Strength Density (N/mm2)
(Kg/m3) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (% increase)
M-40 Grade
Concrete (% increase) (% (% increase) (% increase) (% increase)
increase)
2501.33 47.04 2669.10 47.96 2647.00 44.24
(0 % CNT)

( 0.02% CNT) 2746.97 65.07 2684.85 68.54 2719.63* 63.00*

(optimized) (9.82%) (38.33%) (0.60%) (42.91%) (2.74%) (42.41%)
[Test @ 2 yr.] [Test @ 2 yr.]
The Test Results shows that:-
1. The optimization for CNT=0.02% b.w.c for cement composites up to 28 days. As shown in Fig.4, the
compressive strength shows a gain in strength of 38.7% at 28 days but falling to 15.48% at 90 days & 10% at
180 days. However, it is seen that with the increased addition of carbon nanotubes (0.1% by cement wt.) the
long term strength gain increases appreciably to 69% with a denser composite. For CNTs added concrete
with the 28 days optimization at 0.02% CNT, it was observed that strength gain continued to increase at all
ages, achieving more than double strength of 82.00N/mm2 at 2 yrs. time along with its bulk density at air
exposure.
2. For compressive strength at chloride & sulphate exposure conditions, it is found that there is an appreciable
gain in strength for CNT added concrete of more than 65% & 42% for MgCl2 & MgSO4 exposures, when
compared to M-40 concrete at the same exposures.
3. For microstructure of the fracture surfaces of M-40 Grade Concrete and Carbon nano-Concrete, they were
characterized using scanning electron microscopy. Micro structural SEM investigational studies as shown in
Fig. 3(b) & (c) at 28 days of M-40 Grade Nano-Concrete and M-40 Grade Control Concrete, indicate the
presence of more uniformity in the CNT added nano-concrete while the presence Hydrated Products like C-
S-H and Portlandite (Ca(OH)2) plates is in evidence in Control concrete.
4. Fig. 3(a).suggest that the CNTs tend to interlock the C-S-H clusters in the cement concrete matrix thus
bridging the phase distance between the clusters which is the reason for high strength in Carbon nano-
Concrete [3].

a b c

Fig 3. (a)Schematic diagram of CNT/CSH; (b) Carbon nano-concrete microstructure; (c) M-40 Grade concrete microstructure

5. Conclusions
Buildings and construction account for more than 35% of global final energy use and nearly 40% of energy-
related CO2 emissions according to a Global Status Report, 2017 by World Green Building Council.
Nanotechnology helps to decrease the environmental impact derived from the construction activities- firstly,
nanoproducts can lead to a reduction in cement thus reducing the carbon footprint of the matrix by cutting down
the consumption of cement. Secondly, recycled elements like used aggregates, glass and flyash etc. have been
successfully tested as nanoadmixtures in the cement matrix [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9]. However, there exists a lack of
coherence between the academic field and the industrial requirements and the need for a strategy in the new
industry creation in the nanotechnology field where not only public research institutes, but also existing industries
(including SMEs) can participate. As seen in countries like Japan, China and Europe, to nullify the size
disadvantage of nanomaterials and overcome diseconomies of scale, SMEs often utilize the process of technology
transfer from public funded R&D institutions [10]. Though recently large corporations are investing in
nanotechnology research (in-house), in India the research is mainly funded by Govt. and some of the challenges
listed are its multidisciplinary nature, paucity of skilled labor and dependence on sophisticated equipments [5].
Also, the Niti Ayog which replaced the Planning Commission of India is completely silent on nanotechnology,
except in one area, as expressed in its strategy paper, New India @ 75: ‘Foreign collaborators, consultants,
 visiting faculty, adjunct scientists, etc., need to be involved in pursuing R&D in the emerging areas of basic
sciences such as nano-technology, etc. In this scenario, probably influential global building certificates such as
BREEAM, LEED and Indian Green Building Council Rating Systems, may probably play a key role in fostering
the transformation from ‘macro’ to ‘nano’ within the construction industry but for sustained development an
active support from Indian SMEs is needed which then can further address the ‘Make in India’ initiatives.

60
N/mm2

40 Control Cement Composites

20 0.02 % CNT Cement Compsites

0.05 % CNT Cement Compsites
0
0.1 % CNT Cement Compsites
28 Day 90 Day 180 Day 365 Day
Compressive Strength,N/mm2

Fig 4. Bar Chart showing the strength relationship between Control & CNT Cement Composites at various ages

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Rabindra Bharati University for conforming their nano enabled
Ramanujam building and M/s NANO SHELL-UK, The Structural Waterproofing Co.(Now,Chryso),Kolkata,
Ambuja Cements, Star Cements,UltraTech Cements for providing assistance to carry out the research.

References

[1]Dimov et al. Ultrahigh Performance Nano engineered Graphene–Concrete Composites for

Multifunctional Applications, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1705183. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201705183.
[2]http://www.edencrete.com/case-studies/colorado-spillways/
[3]Anastasia Sobolkina et al. Cement & Concrete Composites, 34 (2012) 1104–1113, 2012
[4]Mahdavinejad, M.; Nazari, M.; Khazforoosh, S. Commercialization strategies for industrial applications
of nanomaterials in building construction. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 829, 879–883.
[5]The Energy and Research Institute,2010.Nanotechnolgy Development in India: Building Capacity and
governing the technology[TERI Briefing paper],supported by IDRC,Canada.
[6]Mohammed, B.S.; Awang, A.B.; Wong, S.S.; Nhavene, C.P. Properties of nano silica modified
rubbercrete. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 119, 66–75.
[7]Li, W.; Luo, Z.; Long, C.; Wu, C.; Duan, W.H.; Shah, S.P. Effects of nanoparticle on the dynamic
behaviors of recycled aggregate concrete under impact loading. Mater. Des. 2016, 112, 58–66.
[8]Harbec, D.; Bahri, H.; Tagnit-Hamou, A.; Gitzhofer, F. New silica fume from recycled glass. In
Proceedings of the Fifth international Symposium on Nanotechnology in Construction, Chicago, IL, USA,
24–26 May 2015.
[9]Aly, M.; Hashmi, M.; Olabi, A.; Messeiry, M.; Abadir, E.; Hussain, A. Effect of colloidal nano-silica on
the mechanical and physical behavior of waste-glass cement mortar. Mater. Des. 2012, 33, 127–135.
[10]H. Purushotham, “Transfer of nanotechnologies from R&D institutions to SMEs in India,” Asia-Pacific
Tech Monitor, vol. 29, no.4, pp. 23-33, October-December 2012.
[11]https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/science-technology/three-ways-nanomaterials-could-help-
combat-climate-change-and-prevent-pollution-58510