Building materials alternative approaches: A bibliometric and review approach

Nathalie  Tornay

doi:10.59400/be.v2i2.1314

Building materials alternative approaches: A bibliometric and review approach

Nathalie Tornay LRA—Laboratoire de Recherche en Architecture, ENSA—École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, 31106 Toulouse, France

Ariticle ID: 1314

194 Views, 131 PDF Downloads

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59400/be.v2i2.1314

Keywords: building material; alternative material; environmental impact; systemic; bibliometry

Abstract

In this paper, we develop a global vision of environmental impact with alternative building materials in architectural design. A bibliometric study is based on 1827 scientific research publications on alternative materials produced between 1998 and 2022. More than 90% of these documents have been published in the last ten years. This bibliometric study goal is to develop a systemic approach for the characterisation of alternative solutions in the context of scarce resource context and climate change. This study highlights three different approaches: 1) an ‘integrative’ approach that develops an implementation approach combining environmental concerns and design teams’ own working methods in the selection of materials; 2) an ‘additive’ approach that selects some environmental criteria (carbon footprint and energy consumption) in addition to implementation issues; 3) a ‘subtractive’ approach that focuses solely on implementation issues.

References

[1] Brown JH, Burger JR, Burnside WR, et al. Macroecology meets macroeconomics: Resource scarcity and global sustainability. Ecological Engineering. 2014; 65: 24-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.07.071

[2] Ruuska A, Häkkinen T. Material Efficiency of Building Construction. Buildings. 2014; 4(3): 266-294. doi: 10.3390/buildings4030266

[3] Hansen K, Braungart M, Mulhall D. Resource Repletionresourcerepletion, Role of Buildings. In: Loftness V, Haase D. (editors). Sustainable Built Environments. Springer; 2013.

[4] Li L. Integrating climate change impact in new building design process: A review of building life cycle carbon emission assessment methodologies. Cleaner Engineering and Technology. 2021; 5: 100286. doi: 10.1016/j.clet.2021.100286

[5] UNEP. Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction 2019. UNEP; 2019.

[6] Zhang X, Wang F. Analysis of embodied carbon in the building life cycle considering the temporal perspectives of emissions: A case study in China. Energy and Buildings. 2017; 155: 404-413. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.049

[7] Orsini F, Marrone P. Approaches for a low-carbon production of building materials: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 241: 118380. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118380

[8] González MJ, García Navarro J. Assessment of the decrease of CO2 emissions in the construction field through the selection of materials: Practical case study of three houses of low environmental impact. Building and Environment. 2006; 41(7): 902-909. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.04.006

[9] Gama EM, Wamuziri S, Sloan B. The use of alternative building materials in developing countries: Addressing challenges faced by stakeholders. In: Proceedings of the World Construction Conference 2012—Global Challenges in Construction Industry; 28-30 June 2012; Colombo, Sri Lanka.

[10] Li X, Qin D, Hu Y, et al. A systematic review of waste materials in cement-based composites for construction applications. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022; 45: 103447. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103447

[11] Thomas BS, Yang J, Mo KH, et al. Biomass ashes from agricultural wastes as supplementary cementitious materials or aggregate replacement in cement/geopolymer concrete: A comprehensive review. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021; 40: 102332. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102332

[12] Salas DA, Ramirez AD, Rodríguez CR, et al. Environmental impacts, life cycle assessment and potential improvement measures for cement production: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 113: 114-122. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.078

[13] Jannat N, Latif Al-Mufti R, Hussien A, et al. Utilisation of nut shell wastes in brick, mortar and concrete: A review. Construction and Building Materials. 2021; 293: 123546. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123546

[14] Amran M, Murali G, Khalid NHA, et al. Slag uses in making an ecofriendly and sustainable concrete: A review. Construction and Building Materials. 2021; 272: 121942. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121942

[15] Ramachandran D. Green Concrete mix using solid waste and nanoparticles as alternatives—A review. Construction and Building Materials. 2018; 162: 96-103. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.174

[16] Ramos Huarachi DA, Gonçalves G, de Francisco AC, et al. Life cycle assessment of traditional and alternative bricks: A review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2020; 80: 106335. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106335

[17] Sotayo A, Bradley D, Bather M, et al. Review of state of the art of dowel laminated timber members and densified wood materials as sustainable engineered wood products for construction and building applications. Developments in the Built Environment. 2020; 1: 100004. doi: 10.1016/j.dibe.2019.100004

[18] Petersen AK, Solberg B. Environmental and economic impacts of substitution between wood products and alternative materials: a review of micro-level analyses from Norway and Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics. 2005; 7: 249-259.

[19] Li Y, Zhang Y, Yang Z, et al. Waterborne coatings with sub-ambient cooling under direct sunlight-part I: Optical properties and cooling effect measurements. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells. 2020; 217: 110672. doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110672

[20] Guldentops G, Ardito G, Tao M, et al. A numerical study of adaptive building enclosure systems using solid-solid phase change materials with variable transparency. Energy and Buildings. 2018; 167: 240-252. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.02.054

[21] Sameer H, Bringezu S. Life cycle input indicators of material resource use for enhancing sustainability assessment schemes of buildings. Journal of Building Engineering. 2019; 21: 230-242. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2018.10.010

[22] Yousefi M, Khandestani R, Gharaei-Moghaddam N. Flexural behavior of reinforced concrete beams made of normal and polypropylene fiber-reinforced concrete containing date palm leaf ash. Structures. 2022; 37: 1053-1068. doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2022.01.067

[23] Ahmad MR, Chen B, Yousefi Oderji S, et al. Development of a new bio-composite for building insulation and structural purpose using corn stalk and magnesium phosphate cement. Energy and Buildings. 2018; 173: 719-733. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.06.007

[24] Wang Y, Rasheed R, Jiang F, et al. Life cycle assessment of a novel biomass-based aerogel material for building insulation. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021; 44: 102988. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102988

[25] Teoh WP, Chee SY, Habib NZ, et al. Recycling of treated alum sludge and glycerine pitch in the production of eco-friendly roofing tiles: Physical properties, durability, and leachability. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022; 52: 104387. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104387

[26] Belfiore CM, Amato C, Pezzino A, et al. An end of waste alternative for volcanic ash: A resource in the manufacture of ceramic tiles. Construction and Building Materials. 2020; 263: 120118. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120118

[27] Ayikoe Tettey UY, Dodoo A, Gustavsson L. Carbon balances for a low energy apartment building with different structural frame materials. Energy Procedia. 2019; 158: 4254-4261. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.801

[28] Martínez-García C, González-Fonteboa B, Carro-López D, et al. Assessment of mussel shells building solutions: A real-scale application. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021; 44: 102635. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102635

[29] Beattie C. Decarbonising new city precincts: A case study in Perth, Western Australia. Renewable Energy. 2014; 67: 64-72. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2013.11.042

[30] Reza B, Sadiq R, Hewage K. Sustainability assessment of flooring systems in the city of Tehran: An AHP-based life cycle analysis. Construction and Building Materials. 2011; 25(4): 2053-2066. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.11.041

[31] Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Ding Y, Rousseau R, Wolfram D (editors). Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice. Springer International Publishing; 2014.

[32] van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2009; 84(2): 523-538. doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

[33] Det Udomsap A, Hallinger P. A bibliometric review of research on sustainable construction, 1994-2018. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020; 254: 120073. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120073

[34] Santos WF, Quattrone M, John VM, et al. Roughness, wettability and water absorption of water repellent treated recycled aggregates. Construction and Building Materials. 2017; 146: 502-513. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.012

[35] Zhao H xiang, Magoulès F. A review on the prediction of building energy consumption. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2012; 16(6): 3586-3592. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.02.049

[36] Laurie AP. Building Materials made of Waste Materials. Nature. 1923; 112(2826): 956-957. doi: 10.1038/112956b0

[37] Aureliano Fd’S, Costa AApF, Júnior IF, Pedroso Rd’O. Manufacture of structural blocks of concrete with waste tire rubbers. Procedia Manufacturing. 2019; 38: 464-470. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.01.059

[38] Galimshina A, Moustapha M, Hollberg A, et al. Bio-based materials as a robust solution for building renovation: A case study. Applied Energy. 2022; 316: 119102. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119102

[39] Palumbo M, Lacasta AM, Giraldo MP, et al. Bio-based insulation materials and their hygrothermal performance in a building envelope system (ETICS). Energy and Buildings. 2018; 174: 147-155. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.06.042

[40] Žigart M, Kovačič Lukman R, Premrov M, et al. Environmental impact assessment of building envelope components for low-rise buildings. Energy. 2018; 163: 501-512. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.149

[41] Zeitz A, Griffin CT, Dusicka P. Comparing the embodied carbon and energy of a mass timber structure system to typical steel and concrete alternatives for parking garages. Energy and Buildings. 2019; 199: 126-133. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.06.047

[42] Cusenza MA, Guarino F, Longo S, et al. An integrated energy simulation and life cycle assessment to measure the operational and embodied energy of a Mediterranean net zero energy building. Energy and Buildings. 2022; 254: 111558. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111558

[43] Zawrah MF, Gado RA, Feltin N, et al. Recycling and utilization assessment of waste fired clay bricks (Grog) with granulated blast-furnace slag for geopolymer production. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2016; 103: 237-251. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2016.08.001

[44] Corinaldesi V, Giuggiolini M, Moriconi G. Use of rubble from building demolition in mortars. Waste Management. 2002; 22: 893-899. doi: 10.1016/S0956-053X(02)00087-9

[45] Bisht A. Sand futures: Post-growth alternatives for mineral aggregate consumption and distribution in the global south. Ecological Economics. 2022; 191: 107233. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107233

[46] Bunzel F, Wisner G, Stammen E, et al. Structural sandwich composites out of wood foam core and textile reinforced concrete sheets for versatile and sustainable use in the building industry. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2020; 31: S296-S302. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.382

[47] Göswein V, Silvestre JD, Lamb S, et al. Invasive alien plants as an alternative resource for concrete production—multi-scale optimization including carbon compensation, cleared land and saved water runoff in South Africa. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2021; 167: 105361. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105361

[48] Humbert PS, Castro-Gomes JP, Savastano H. Clinker-free CO2 cured steel slag based binder: Optimal conditions and potential applications. Construction and Building Materials. 2019; 210: 413-421. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.169

[49] Vashistha P, Singh SK, Dutt D, et al. Sustainable utilization of paper mill solid wastes via synthesis of nano silica for production of belite based clinker. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 224: 557-565. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.207

[50] Akbar A, Farooq F, Shafique M, et al. Sugarcane bagasse ash-based engineered geopolymer mortar incorporating propylene fibers. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021; 33: 101492. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101492

[51] Alonso MM, Gascó C, Morales MM, et al. Olive biomass ash as an alternative activator in geopolymer formation: A study of strength, radiology and leaching behaviour. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2019; 104: 103384. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.103384

[52] Bajracharya RM, Manalo AC, Karunasena W, et al. An overview of mechanical properties and durability of glass-fibre reinforced recycled mixed plastic waste composites. Materials & Design (1980-2015). 2014; 62: 98-112. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2014.04.081

[53] Binici H, Aksogan O, Demirhan C. Mechanical, thermal and acoustical characterizations of an insulation composite made of bio-based materials. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2016; 20: 17-26. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2015.09.004

[54] Suksiripattanapong C, Jenpiyapong K, Tiyasangthong S, et al. Mechanical and thermal properties of lateritic soil mixed with cement and polymers as a non-bearing masonry unit. Case Studies in Construction Materials. 2022; 16: e00962. doi: 10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e00962

[55] Ahmad T, Aibinu A, Thaheem MJ. BIM-based Iterative Tool for Sustainable Building Design: A Conceptual Framework. Procedia Engineering. 2017; 180: 782-792. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.04.239

[56] Ahmed N, Abdel-Hamid M, Abd El-Razik MM, et al. Impact of sustainable design in the construction sector on climate change. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2021; 12(2): 1375-1383. doi: 10.1016/j.asej.2020.11.002

[57] Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B, et al. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2016; 21(9): 1218-1230. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8

[58] IEA. Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction 2019. IEA; 2019.

[59] Predeanu G, Slăvescu V, Bălănescu M, et al. Coal bottom ash processing for capitalization according to circular economy concept. Minerals Engineering. 2021; 170: 107055. doi: 10.1016/j.mineng.2021.107055

Published

2024-07-29

How to Cite

Tornay, N. (2024). Building materials alternative approaches: A bibliometric and review approach. Building Engineering, 2(2), 1314. https://doi.org/10.59400/be.v2i2.1314

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 2 (2024)

Section

Review

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Editor-in-Chief

Prof. Scholz Miklas
University of Johannesburg, South Africa

eISSN

3029-2670

Publication Frequency

Semi-annual

About the Publisher

Academic Publishing insists on taking academic exchange and publication as the main line, carrying out comprehensive management based on science and technology, and fully exploring excellent international publishing resources. Within 5 years, it will form a strategic framework and scale with science (S), technology (T), medicine (M), education (E), and humanities and arts (H) as the main publishing fields. Academic Publishing is headquartered in Singapore and based in Malaysia, with the United States and China providing the main scientific and academic resources. At the same time, it has established long-term good cooperative relations with other publishing companies, scientific research communities, and academic organizations in more than a dozen countries and regions. Academic Publishing uses English and Chinese as its main publishing languages, mainly publishing books, journals, and conference papers in print and online. The vast majority of publications follow the international open access policy, providing stable and long-term quality and professional publications. With the joint efforts of the expert team and our professional editorial team, our publications will gradually be indexed by international databases in stages to provide convenient and professional retrieval for various scholars. At the same time, manuscripts we accept will be subject to the peer review principle, and cutting-edge and innovative research articles will be preferentially accepted for peer reference and discussion. All kinds of our publications are welcome for peer to contribute, access, and download.

more

Volume Arrangement

2024

Vol 2, No 2 (2024)

Vol 2, No 1 (2024)

2023

Vol 1, No 1 (2023)

Featured Articles

Comprehensive seismic loss model of Tehran, Iran in the case of Mosha fault seismic scenario using stochastic finite-fault method

This paper presents the results of a study caried out to assess probable seismic loss, in term of damage to the residential buildings and the number of fatalities, in the case of Mosha Fault seismic scenario in Tehran, Iran. Accordingly, seismic risk components (including seismic hazard, exposure model and fragility curves) are evaluated. The stochastic finite-fault method with dynamic corner frequency is applied for quantifying ground motion values. The results shows that PGA on the soil surface could range between 0.1 g to 0.45 g. Then, a reliable model of building exposure by analyzing census data from Tehran is compiled. This model included 19 different classes of buildings and is used to evaluate the potential damage to buildings from seismic scenario. The results indicate that the median of damage ratio from 100,000 iterations for the whole of the city is about 6% ± 1.54%. The study found that the central and eastern parts of Tehran are the most vulnerable areas, with an estimated 15,952 residents at risk of losing their lives in this scenario. This is equivalent to 0.2 percent of total population of Tehran. The finding from this study can be used by local authorities to provide appropriate emergency-response and preparedness plans in the case of Mosha Fault seismic scenario.

Digital transformation of quality management in the construction industry during the execution phase by integration of building information modeling (BIM) and cloud computing

The quality of construction projects significantly impacts social and economic development. However, low quality and project failure often result from factors such as lack of quality procedures, poor communication, task coordination, and inefficient progress monitoring. This research aims to improve the efficiency of the construction phase by creating quality control checklists for processes and enhancing quality management through a collaborative digital environment integrating building information modeling (BIM) and cloud computing. Expert constructive interviews were first conducted to define a construction process quality control procedure to be linked to the 3DBIM model and then transition to a collaborative cloud environment (Autodesk Construction Cloud). An actual instance in Latakia City (Syria) demonstrated that the proposed methodology improves the efficiency and effectiveness of quality management during the implementation phase. It does so by offering a robust database, enhancing on-site quality information extraction from BIM models using smartphones, documenting defects and entering inspection data directly into a shared digital environment, and making it easier to track corrective actions and feedback. This facilitates constant and organized access to current data, reducing errors and rework, saving money and time, and enhancing decision-making speed and effectiveness. The search recommends the necessity of strict laws to adhere to quality procedures and the importance of providing infrastructure for digital transformation in quality management.

Net zero energy analysis and energy conversion of sustainable residential building in Muscat, Oman

The building sector is the predominant consumer of primary energy globally. The building sector accounts for around 40% of global energy production.Net Zero Energy Buildings (NZEBs) are highly suggested by energy experts as an effective option to alleviate the strain on primary energy sources caused by the building sector. The disparity between energy performance predictions provided during the design phase and the actual energy performance of residential buildings is mostly attributed to a limited comprehension of the components that influence energy consumption and the constraints of whole building simulation software. The objective of this research was to perform a comparison analysis of the expected and actual energy consumption of a prototype net-zero energy house built at the University of Technology and Applied Sciences in Muscat. The Hourly Analysis Programme (HAP V4.2) was utilised to forecast the energy consumption of a Net Zero Energy Building (NZEB) at HCT, taking into account the availability of an Energy Recovery Ventilator (ERV) and the absence of an ERV. The newly built house underwent a one-month testing phase to fulfil many duties according to competition regulations. One of the main goals was to generate on-site energy through photovoltaic panels, producing an amount proportional to the energy consumed by the house. Upon comparing the actual energy consumption data with the simulated result, it was noticed that the actual energy demand of the house was around 20% lower than the prediction made by the simulation tool.

Architecting sustainability performances and enablers for grid-interactive efficient buildings

Today, grid-interactive efficient buildings are gaining popularity due to their potential sustainability performances through their ability to learn, adapt, and evolve at different scales to improve the quality of life of their users while optimizing resource usage and service availability. This is realized through various practices such as management and control measures enabled by smart grid technologies, interoperability, and human-cyber-physical security. However, despite their great potential, the research of those technologies still faces various challenges. These include a lack of communication and control infrastructure to address interpretability, security, cost barriers, and difficulties balancing occupant needs with grid benefits. Initially, system modelling and simulation are promising approaches to address those challenges ahead of time. It involves the consideration of complex systems made up of components from various research domains. This paper addresses the above practices, highlighting the value of integrating technology and intelligence in the planning and operation of buildings, both new and old. It provides a way to educate architects and engineers about this emerging field and demonstrates how these practices can help in creating efficient, resilient, and secure buildings that contribute to occupant comfort and decarbonization.