Comparative study of reinforced concrete design based on American Concrete Institute (ACI-318) and Eurocode 2 (EC2)

Thumbnail Image

Files

master_Muftaudeen_Saheed_2025.pdf (1.54 MB)

URL

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

School of Engineering | Master's thesis
Unless otherwise stated, all rights belong to the author. You may download, display and print this publication for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.

Authors

Date

2025-11-24

Department

Major/Subject

Mcode

Degree programme

Master's Programme in Geoengineering
Georakentamisen maisteriohjelma
Magisterprogrammet i geobyggande

Language

en

Pages

86

Series

Abstract

The increasing urgency to reduce carbon emissions in the built environment has intensified interest in evaluating how structural design standards influence material efficiency, economic cost, and environmental performance. This thesis presents a comparative evaluation of reinforced concrete frame design using the provisions of Eurocode 2 and the American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-19), with a focus on structural performance, economic, and sustainability outcomes. A two-storey, two-bay RC frame was designed using each code independently to generate total steel reinforcement quantities. For this study, the concrete volume for each element (Slab, beam, and column) remained the same in both designs. Based on the design outcome, the steel reinforcement requirements showed modest differences: EC 2 required slightly more steel in beams, while ACI required more reinforcement in both slabs and columns. To interpret the practical implications of these material differences, the study integrated Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing. Two decision-oriented scenarios were developed. Scenario 1 used identical embodied carbon factors and unit material costs, providing a controlled comparison that isolates the influence of design standards. Scenario 2 assigned region-specific factors representing typical conditions in the European Union and the United States, allowing assessment of how regional material factors affect environmental and economic performance. Based on Scenario 1, the sustainability outcomes of EC 2 and ACI 318 were nearly identical. Embodied carbon differed by approximately 2%, and total material cost by 1.2%, indicating that, for this structural configuration under study, the choice of design code has minimal impact on whole-structure sustainability when material factors are held constant. However, Scenario 2 revealed that regional material characteristics exert a far more substantial influence. Applying US-based material data increased embodied carbon by approximately 67% and costs by 21% relative to the EU scenario. This disparity, especially in the embodied carbon, stemmed mainly from the higher carbon intensity of US concrete production, underscoring the predominance of supply-chain effects over code-driven design differences.

Description

Supervisor

Noureldin, Mohamed

Keywords

reinforced concrete, American Concrete Institute, Eurocode 2, life cycle assessment, life cycle costing, embodied carbon

Other note

Citation

Permanent link to this item

https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:aalto-202512159177

Collections

[dipl] Insinööritieteiden korkeakoulu / ENG