Concrete Products covers the issues that attract producers of ready mixed and manufactured concrete focusing on equipment and material technology, market development and management topics.
Issue link: http://concrete.epubxp.com/i/714465
www.concreteproducts.com August 2016 • 37 FEATURE RMC FOUNDATION @25 Optimizing Concrete Mixtures for Performance and Sustainabil- ity. Based on findings from testing at the NRMCA Research Lab in College Park, Md., this report examines how reducing or eliminating minimum cementitious materials requirements in mixtures will allow for more flexibility in achieving better performance and a more sus- tainable building or pavement design. Evaluation of Performance-Based Alternatives to the Durability Provisions of ACI 318 Building Codes. Also centered in the College Park lab, this project seeks to increase the implementation of perfor- mance-based specifications that will be accepted by state highway agencies and the industry. It is part of a larger pooled-fund study in the development of performance criteria for concrete that will be resistant to chloride penetration, freeze-thaw cycles and sulfate exposure. LEED v4 Material Ingredient Disclosure Guide. Prepared with Foundation funding, in collaboration with NRMCA and architectural/ engineering giant Arup, the document provides information on how ready mixed producers may contribute toward the Materials and Resources: Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Material Ingredients credit in LEED v4—the green building standard set for widespread adoption in fall 2016. To qualify for the credit, producers need to work with their suppliers to obtain comprehensive infor- mation on mixture components' material ingredients and chemical constituents. The guide enables them to choose their own best path for meeting M&R;/Disclosure requirements. FOUNDATION ROOTS The timely topics above are a far cry from the more pedestrian endeavor that led to the RMC Foun- dation chartering. Setting aside immediate concerns of the 1991 recession—marked by a walloping 10 million-ton drop in year-over- year cement shipments—the NRMCA Research, Engineering and Standards Committee determined that the College Park lab needed a 1 million-lb. capacity compres- sive strength testing machine. The investment was partly driven by the increasing commercialization of higher strength (> 8,000 psi) con- cretes, beginning in the prior decade. Over the years, NRMCA and the industry "passed the hat" when special projects needed funding. Since the testing machine was a relatively large investment, leaders at the time decided to form a 501 (c)(3) non-profit so that contributions made toward the effort could be tax deductible. After the funds were raised and testing machine purchased, the Foundation was dormant until another special need was identified. The early 1990s grassroots movement toward industry excellence, RMC 2000, targeted a world-class sales management training program to help improve the professionalism, knowledge and success of man- agers and sales professionals. NRMCA took on the task of developing the program, using the Foundation as a funding vehicle. Once again, the "hat was passed" and tax deductible contributions were made into the Foundation for this singular purpose. Funds raised were promptly spent on developing the program, leaving the coffers bare. By the late 1990s, the NRMCA Vision Strategic Planning Committee determined the Foundation could become a much greater industry resource by creating an endowment. It would allow the contributions to be invested and money to grow and enable the industry to take a longer-term view of research and education. And, it would be more insulated from the inevitable ups and downs of the construction cycle, allowing investments to be made in good times and bad. By the close of the decade, a campaign was in full swing to raise money for the endowment. Major contributions were made by vertically integrated producers, with many more small and medium sized contributions from independent operators as well as material suppliers, equipment manufacturers and industry service providers. MIT CSHUB When the Foundation formed as an endowment and separate entity from NRMCA, a formal approvals process was put in place for project funding. It has largely remained the same: Under a three-tier pro- cess for candidate project review, an Advisory Council of technical professionals and management personnel make recommendations on project proposals to the Program Committee, which is a Board of Trustees subset. The Program Committee makes a recommendation to the Board, which then considers project merit and budget factors when making a final decision. Foundation committees and the board meet roughly twice a year, and convene special conference calls when projects are of high impor- tance and warrant quick action. "The endowment has allowed us to take a longer-term view on funding decisions, and make investments even above and beyond our annual budget when a project is of great importance to the industry," says Julie Garbini. "It has also allowed us to expand our vision beyond just individual projects, to investments like co-sponsoring the Concrete Sustainability Hub at Massachusetts Institute of Technology." The combined 10-year (2009–2014, renewed 2015-2019), $20 million commitment—split evenly between the RMC Foundation and Portland Cement Association—was sealed during the worst con- struction recession in history, she adds, but allowed the sponsors to conduct research and develop tools which will now let the industry take full advantage of the rapidly growing sustainable-construction market segment. With research oriented around the main cement and concrete end uses, buildings and infrastructure, CSHub is trying to "change the rules of the game" for how procurement decisions and specifications are made. With scientific research and models, MIT staff has created the tools A/E/C professionals and project owners need to take a life cycle approach—weighing cost, performance and sustainability for the full service life, including operation phase—so that they can make better long-term decisions. CSHub staff has engaged with at least 12 state departments of transportation on Pavements Life Cycle Assessment (environmental) and/or Life Cycle Cost Analysis models developed on the MIT campus. Many LCA and LCCA models exist; however, unique to CSHub's work is inclusion of the all-important "use" phase, where the greatest impact lies and concrete typically has the best advantage. In addition to state DOTs, LCA and LCCA findings have resonated with the Federal Highway Administration and Transportation Research Board. Topping the CSHub deliverables for concrete pavements have been studies of projects involving: a) LCA or LCCA (or both) models enabling state agency officials and lawmakers to see first-hand how various factors apply to their specific systems, whereby they can make more informed network decisions and invest in stronger, stiffer pavements in areas where it matters most; and, b) effects of pavement-vehicle interaction and the pavement "use" phase, both included in FHWA's primary guidance document on sustainability. On the buildings front, CSHub staff has likewise honed LCA and LCCA for both residential and nonresidential projects. The analyses