Compressive Strength of CO₂-Cured Concrete
Description
Establishing database The raw data used in this paper were only obtained through peer-reviewed laboratory research on CO₂-cured concrete because the large-scale field application of carbonation-curing technology is not very common. The database was compiled from published experimental studies reporting controlled programmes on accelerated CO₂ curing of cement-based materials (Sidhu et al., 2023; El-Hassan et al., 2013; El-Hassan & Shao, 2015; El-Hassan & Shao, 2014; Shao, 2014; Shao & Morshed, 2015; Zhang & Shao, 2016; Zhang & Shao, 2019; Rostami et al., 2011; Shao & Lin, 2011; El-Hassan, 2013; Rostami et al., 2012; Morshed & Shao, 2013; Shao et al., 2014; Ijongcan et al., 2016; Liu, 2016; Zhang et al., 2016; Zhang & Shao, 2016; Chen & Gao, 2019; Lee et al., 2018; Li et al., 2019; Chen & Gao, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020; Sharma & Goyal, 2022; Wang et al., 2022; and Xian et al., 2023 The research papers reviewed in the previous decade offer a wide range of research on concrete and mortar samples exposed to controlled CO₂ conditions. The proportion of mixtures, carbonation curing parameters, and the respective 28-day compressive strength values were reported in each investigation as a result of standardised testing procedures. An organised and clear screening procedure was adopted to provide methodological consistency and reduce selection bias. The inclusion criteria were that the studies (i) must report 28-day compressive strength calculated according to the ASTM standards; (ii) must have full documentation of the mixture constituents and carbonation curing parameters; and (iii) must be clear in the description of the preparation and testing of the specimen. Records were filtered out when they had missing variables, inconsistent unit systems, ambiguous curing conditions or duplicate experimental records. Where several curing regimes were studied in one study, each curing condition was analysed as an independent sample to maintain experimental variation and avoid aggregation bias. The screening regulations were used consistently across the sources in order to be objective. Following verification and data cleaning based on rules, 198 complete documented samples were included in the final dataset.