buildings

Review
Low-Carbon Self-Healing Concrete: State-of-the-Art,
Challenges and Opportunities
Danah Albuhairi and Luigi Di Sarno *

Department of Civil Engineering and Industrial Design, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The sustainability of the construction industry is a priority in innovations made towards
mitigating its notoriously high carbon emissions. Developments in low-carbon concrete technology
are of peak interest today under the scrutiny of emerging policy pressures. Concrete is the external
part of most structures vulnerable to permanent degradation and weathering, the possibility of an
intrinsic restoration of its engineering properties promises unprecedented advancements towards
structural resilience. Existing research in self-healing concrete (SHC) has often concerned the scope
of material development and evaluation with inconclusive field testing, hindering its progress
towards structural feasibility. This paper presents an overview of recent progress in SHC, and
possible opportunities and challenges of popular healing systems are discussed. Moreover, trends
are observed to investigate SHC’s influence on the engineering properties of concrete, and future
projections of SHC are suggested with identification of potential research needs.

Keywords: low-carbon concrete; sustainability; structural resilience; self-healing concrete application

1. Introduction
Citation: Albuhairi, D.; Di Sarno, L. As a primary engineering material, concrete contributes greatly to the impact of the
Low-Carbon Self-Healing Concrete: construction industry on the global environment emitting approximately 8% of the global
State-of-the-Art, Challenges and carbon dioxide emissions [1,2], a poor trend that may rise with growing populations. How-
Opportunities. Buildings 2022, 12, ever, the urgency for green concrete is globally expanding as legal regulations intervene,
1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ placing a new challenge on existing means of concrete manufacturing and application.
buildings12081196 The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals [3] and independent regulations of
Academic Editor: Abdelhafid Khelidj individual countries have placed the industry under unprecedented scrutiny to control its
carbon footprint.
Received: 27 May 2022 In addressing some of the main influencing factors contributing to unsustainable
Accepted: 6 August 2022
practices such as the phenomenon of concrete cracking, the construction industry can
Published: 9 August 2022
expect promising lifecycles of various structures. Cracking creates an open path for the
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral ingress of harmful substances into concrete structures, exposing steel reinforcement to the
with regard to jurisdictional claims in risk of corrosion and overall degradation of structural integrity. Similarly, the anticipated
published maps and institutional affil- atmospheric deterioration due to climate change effects may also threaten the lifecycle
iations. and resilience of existing concrete structures. Consequently, increased concrete production
becomes a requirement with maintenance and demolition of deteriorated structures, hence
directly influencing the industry’s carbon footprint. Within this context, costly maintenance
is in demand; however, in addition to being uneconomical, some cracks and defects are hard
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
to detect and reach in certain structures and/or ageing infrastructure. Current practices
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
geared towards controlling concrete cracking and improving durability mainly constitute
This article is an open access article
the use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) and various admixtures, as well
distributed under the terms and
as the traditional approach of steel reinforcement. The SCMs adopted are often low-carbon
conditions of the Creative Commons
industrial by-products or landfill waste such as ground granulated blast-furnace slag
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
(GGBS), pulverised fuel ash (PFA), coal bottom ash (CBA), glass, ceramics, etc., where their
4.0/).
use in concrete contributes to a circular economy. Most SCMs can enhance the Ordinary

Buildings 2022, 12, 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12081196 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 2 of 13

Portland Cement (OPC) concrete properties such as reduced porosity, heat generation,
and subsequent improved hydration, hence enhancing durability, quality, and overall
practicality in versatile environments. A relatively novel approach to improving structural
resilience is the enhancement of the concrete itself in preference to reinforcement reliance.
This is achieved through enhancing the intrinsically regenerative nature of concrete with
complimentary admixtures or through the inclusion of self-healing agents (SHA) and
microorganisms capable of producing self-healing concrete (SHC).
The advantages of using SHC in structural engineering are represented by its eval-
uation methods involving the reset of mechanical properties, and degree of durability
improvement following environmental exposure. Moreover, the sustainability of SHC is ev-
ident in its utilisation of abundantly available microorganisms or chemical agents, whereas,
conventional treatments, such as applying chemicals, have several environmental and
practical limitations. In reference to the advantages of using SHC shown in Figure 1, this
paper presents a state-of-the-art review transcending the existing literature in its narrower
scope of material development. Alternatively, recent progress in SHC is refined to inform
of current and projected opportunities and challenges in relevance to specific structural
applications in construction.

Reinforcement Service Life Increase

Lifecycle Cost
Maintenance

Decrease
Durability

Figure 1. Advantages of self-healing concrete in construction.

2. Approaches of Self-Healing
Self-healing approaches may be categorised as either autogenous or autonomous, with
prominent autonomous systems being the vascular network system and the encapsulation
system [4]. The main distinction between autogenous and autonomous healing systems
lies in the relationship to environmental conditions such that autogenous healing is limited
to the triggering of the environmental exposure and hence poorly predictable, whereas
autonomous healing has the potential of independent activation from within the concrete
due to the autonomy of the embedded system.

2.1. Autogenous Self-Healing

Intrinsic or autogenous healing is a process where partial crack repair is achieved
through the natural chemical processes associated with ageing concrete. For example,
healing is mainly caused by further hydration of majorly unhydrated components in
young concrete which reduce in content as concrete hardens and matures. Autogenous
self-healing can occur in diverse infrastructures with versatile environmental conditions
including underwater, underground, and cyclic wet–dry environments. However, the
current literature agrees on autogenous healing limitation being governed by the width of
the crack to be healed [5–7]. In practical applications of traditional concrete structures, it is
unrealistic to have a controlled crack width; therefore, three prominent recommendations
have been made towards improving autogenous self-healing functionality: incorporating
mineral or expansive admixtures, using engineered cementitious composites (ECC), and by
the modification of the following factors:
1. Curing conditions: Water curing is recommended to facilitate precipitation of heal-
ing products.
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 3 of 13

2. Crack width: Healable width mostly limited to 200 µm.

3. Water–cement ratio: Higher cement to water ratio has more unhydrated cement parti-
cles available for further hydration.
4. Concrete age: Where possible, it is better to induce cracking at early ages.
5. Internal stress: Prestressing at an early age to increase recovery of mechanical properties.
In precracked concrete beams, flexural strength recovery was seen in samples exposed
to early compressive load [8]. In another study of concrete prisms, samples exposed to
early compressive stress showed improved healing and mechanical properties recovery [9].
Ordinary concrete generally has a higher heat evolution, producing thermal expansion
which triggers autogenous shrinkage and cracking [10]. This issue is typically addressed
by using SCMs with low heat evolution, easing the application of mass pouring of concrete
due to the controlled cracking. Some of the main durability parameters controlling concrete
durability such as porosity and permeability are somewhat controlled with SCMs. In
addition, long-term strength development is often found in employing SCMs due to a
retarded hydration rate; however, the early-age strength may be compromised. Moreover,
the sustainability of using mineral admixtures is well established; Tait and Cheung (2016)
have demonstrated this in a study with three mixes utilising 100% cement, 65% PFA, and
70% of GGBS replacement where the SCM samples have shown the least environmental
impact [11].
One of the most used expansive minerals in SHC is crystalline admixture (CA), de-
fined by The European Standard 934-2 as water-resistant and by the ACI 212.3R-16 as
a permeability reducer in concrete [12]. This disparity in definition hints at the issue of
CA in research where a large variability exists due to nonunified and commercialised
compositions. However, its suitability in SHC is made clear due to the admixture’s ability
to remain inactive until it has been triggered by moisture or water ingress. The controlled
crack width requirement has been found to be achievable with the use of fibers or polymers
producing an engineered cementitious composite (ECC) with improved durability and
long-term ductility. This is accomplished as hydrophilic fibers can restrict crack width and
serve as sites for healing product formation. The use of ECCs offsets the issues of concrete
brittleness due to the ductility of the fibers or polymers which restrict fatigue cracking and
concrete spalling, therefore reducing the risk of reinforcement corrosion. ECC concrete has
specifically been a breakthrough for bridge construction, where shrinkable polymers with
high ductility (bendability) can extend a deck’s service life. Moreover, in using different
autogenous healing systems, Table 1 summarises prominent reported recommendations
and limitations consistently established in literature.

Table 1. Autogenous self-healing concrete recommendations and limitations.

Method Recommendation Limitation

Healing mostly limited to early-age crack
High cement content to increase amount of formation and hydration phases.
Intrinsic
unhydrated cement for further hydration. Healing mostly limited to crack widths up to
200 µm [13].
Continued water exposure is required due to
low permeability.
Moderate SCM replacement by cement binder
Not repeatable to exhaustive mineral and
Mineral admixture for sufficient availability of carbon hydroxide.
cement supply and reactivity.
Wet exposure.
Poor early-age mechanical properties due to
delayed hydration.
High cement content. Slow healing pace [16].
Crystalline admixture Up to 4.5% by weight of cement. Healing mostly limited to crack widths up to
Wet exposure [14,15]. 300 µm [17].
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 4 of 13

2.2. Autonomous Self-Healing

Healing agents of various chemical compositions and various types of microorganisms
can be used to compensate for the limitations of autogenous crack healing in concrete. In
the autonomic self-healing system, these innovations are added into the concrete through
encapsulation or the utilisation of an embedded vascular flow network. The direct addi-
tion of healing agents and bacteria is generally not recommended as the functionality is
drastically compromised due to mixing agitation, hydration processes reducing calcium
source and pore volume, which lowers the reactivity for healing product formation and
damages the integrity of chemical agents or bacteria. In using encapsulation techniques
or vascular networks, the healing agents are alternatively shielded against the highly ag-
gressive environment of concrete and therefore secured against premature activation. The
vascular network method is practically suitable for use in precast concrete elements [5];
however, novel 3D-printed mini-vascular networks are being explored for the increased
flexibility of conveniently placing the printed mini-vascular network into concrete molds
before casting [18]. This can address the specific area in which cracking is anticipated and
ensure minimum spontaneity of healing action. Other promising technologies include the
development of biomimetic concrete inspired by the natural defenses where vegetation
and natural habitats can be hosted within a noninvasive unreinforced/reinforced concrete
structure applicable to existing and new infrastructure with minimal energy consumption
and resource quantum [18–24].
The efficiency of autonomous healing functionality remains dependent on adequate
modification of concrete existing factors; therefore, a recommendation for biological healing
systems is to incorporate a secondary component (i.e., bacteria food source, nutrients, etc.)
which acts as a “controlled” trigger for the healing agents to activate without full reliance on
external environment or human intervention. In biotechnological SHC, the most commonly
used microorganism tends to be the genus of bacillus due to its ability of withstanding
the harsh concrete environment [25]. Moreover, studies have found that a bacteria con-
centration of 105 colony-forming unit (cfu)/mL is recommended for improving concrete
properties reporting enhanced mechanical properties and durability as well as strength
recovery [26–30]. Another potentially viable yet less explored alternative to bacteria is fungi
showing healing mechanisms comparable to the former microorganism [19–21]. In chem-
ical systems of SHC, widely used healing agents involve silica-containing minerals [31].
The relevance of silica-containing minerals is also found in their use as alkali activators
of cementitious materials in some alkali-activated concretes, potentially explaining their
use in SHC through the precipitation of binding products alternatively filling cracks. Most
reported recommendations and limitations of employing different autonomous healing
systems are further detailed in Table 2.

Table 2. Autonomous self-healing concrete recommendations and limitations.

Method Recommendation Limitation

Low microcapsule content and size to mimic
aggregate bonding.
Customable brittleness capsule (elastic when hydrated
Difficulty establishing upscaling techniques for
Encapsulation and brittle dried).
industrial use.
Uniform dispersion of capsules for distributed healing.
Placing capsules in molds during casting to avoid
rupture during mixing [32].
Vascular flow Homogenous distribution of vessels. Impractical due to manual and strategic installation.

3. SHC Structural Engineering Performance

In evaluating the self-healing performance of concrete, mechanical strength recovery,
durability improvement and microstructural analysis are of main interest following expo-
sure to deterioration and cracking. In specific, the influence of different healing systems
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 5 of 13

on the engineering properties is substantial to support understanding the role of invoked

healing processes in the development of mechanical and durability properties paramount
to the structural engineering performance.

3.1. Mechanical Properties

A non-exhaustive summary of existing research is shown in Table 3, where figures
are limited to the highest engineering performance of the respective study selected for
conforming to Eurocodes, Canadian, American and Indian Standards. The selected studies
are therefore repeatable and allow confirmatory corroboration for further reliability and
mitigation of testing disparity in SHC. Generally, a trend is observed where the mechanical
properties of concrete are improved in utilising healing systems.

Table 3. The influence of various SHC systems on engineering mechanical properties.

Mechanical Properties
7 Days
28 Days
Healing System Concrete Nutrient Curing 56 Days Ref.
Compressive Split Tensile Flexural
Strength Strength Strength
Crystalline admixture
CEM II 32.5N - Water ↑ 18% - - [33]
(0.8% wt. cement)
Crystalline admixture
CEM II 42.5 R - Water ↑ 12% - - [34]
(0.8% wt. cement)
1% wt. cement 500 µm -
Arabic shell of liquid ↓ 4%
- -
sodium silicate ↓ 9%
OPC - Water - - [35]
1% wt. cement 130 µm -
- -
poly-urea of solid ↑ 7%
sodium silicate ↓ 11%
B. Subtilis
OPC-43 Veg broth Water ↑ 32% ↑ 14% ↑ 29% [28]
(105 cells/mL wt.)
↑ 19% - -
0.5% calcium
B. Subtilis (105 µBC) OPC Water ↑ 24% ↑ 25% - [29]
lactate
↑ 32% ↑ 26% -
↑ 18% - -
OPC and 0.5% calcium
B. Subtilis (105 µBC) Water ↑ 17% ↑ 16% - [30]
basalt fiber lactate
↑ 15% ↑ 17% -
Sporosarcina pasteurii calcium
OPC Water ↑ 44% ↑ 36% - [36]
(107 µBC) nitrate-urea
Note: Denoted ↑—increase, and ↓—decrease. A single figure is representative of the 28 days result.

In using crystalline admixtures, the sealing functionality is stimulated at an accelerated

rate in comparison to ordinary concrete such that a study has found sealing efficiency
of SHC between 1 and 3 months to be comparable to ordinary concrete’s capacity after
3–6 months [37]. An agreeing experiment testing the self-healing functionality of crystalline
admixtures in concrete has shown poor compressive strength development in contrast
with ordinary concrete [38]; however, the SHC rate of strength recovery was superior.
It is recommended that cracking is induced during early ages to attain the advantages
of autogenous healing prominent at younger ages. In some cases, it was found that the
precracking induced at 7 days has resulted in 10% higher strength recovery and crack
closure in contrast to 28 days cracking; however, the former has had larger crack widths
which accumulated chloride ions. This recommendation may be explained by the premature
flexural properties’ development of younger concrete, and therefore minimal control of
crack, whereas mature concrete possesses greater control of cracking width and extent.
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 6 of 13

In using chemical SHC systems, Giannaros et al. [35] have reported superior 28 days
compressive strengths of the SHC samples in comparison to the control; however, at
56 days, the control samples had comparatively improved. A possible explanation for
this may be that there was capsule rupture causing an accelerated early hydration which
enhanced strength development up to 28 days; this is also seen in field case studies [39].
The flexural strength of the smaller capsules exceeded the values of the larger capsules;
this may be due to microstructural integrity. However, from a structural view, this may be
compared to standard steel reinforcement where reduced reinforcement (reduced capsule
size) contributes to the favourable ductile failure, and increased reinforcement (larger
capsule size) may compromise flexural properties. Moreover, there was no correlation
between the crack widths reported and the mechanical performance such that the smaller
capsule SHC had smaller crack widths with low compressive strength values, whereas the
larger capsules had larger cracks and showed higher compressive strength values.
The typically autogenous approach of using basalt fibres has proven to be an efficient
healing system with enhanced compressive strength and flexural strength when combined
with bacteria [30]. Moreover, engineering properties have been reported to have been
recovered to a high degree following the application of 60% of load-bearing capacity at
28 days. The combined action of fibres restricting crack width and bacteria filling the cracks
may sufficiently address unwarranted healing activation.
In a study of bacterial RC beams incorporating a microbial-induced carbonate pre-
cipitation healing system [36], the deflection of the SHC beams was reported to increase
progressively with increasing crack widths; however, higher loads were sustained. More-
over, assessed recovery of the flexural strength of the SHC was found to be 73%, whereas
OPC concrete has shown a decrease of 41%. Hence, the study has concluded that improved
flexural stiffness and load-bearing capacity may be achieved with bacterial RC beams. This
may be attributed to the general increase of compressive strength reported in bacterial
concrete, which has improved ductility. The latter response characteristic can be useful for
the application of SHC in structures exposed to extreme natural and/or man-made hazards,
e.g., earthquakes, floods, strong winds, explosions, and impacts. The study recommends
for bacterial SHC to include the incorporation of a nutrient source and the introduction
of cracking at an early age of 7 days for optimal tensile strength recovery; this is also
applicable in using autogenous SHC incorporating crystalline admixtures [33].

3.2. Durability Properties

The durability of SHC is mainly assessed by the improvement of durability following
exposure to degradation. Improvements in transport properties (i.e., permeability, sorptiv-
ity, and diffusivity), resistance to corrosion and chemical attacks, etc., are of interest when
investigating durability properties in SHC.
In investigating the corrosion resistance of bacterial RC beams and cylinders [36],
a 90% reduction in corrosion probability is reported; this is possibly linked to the in-
creased watertightness. The decreased water absorption rate in bacterial SHC has been
relatively consistent in research compared to OPC concrete [40–45], hence lower porosity is
often found in microstructural analysis [28]. In using crystalline admixtures, its nature as
water-resistant and permeability-reducing [12] hints at an ability to sustain a lower water
absorption rate; this has been established in various experiments with different components
of the admixture [18,19,33–35]. However, in the use of crystalline admixtures, there is a
lack of comparability in research [16,17] due to nonlinearity in admixture composition and
testing methods [12,16], this hinders understanding its feasibility in relation to comparably
well-documented performance of bacterial SHC.
In practical applications, SHC may be an attractive technology for seismically risky
locations where the smallest of impact loads present a risk of cracking in concrete; this
is especially true due to the shared parametric interests regarding repeatability of self-
healing under cyclic loading (i.e., earthquake dynamic loads). In a study testing the
dynamic behaviour of SHC utilising microencapsulated epoxy-resin subjected to impact
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 7 of 13

loading [46], the SHC was shown to have an enhanced energy absorption capacity and
a dynamic strength increase parallel to the increasing strain rate. The ability of SHC to
have an improved self-healing functionality in exposure to water also suggests that it
may be appropriate for humid, rainy, seaside, breakwater, and underground foundation
applications. This is especially useful in the face of rising sea levels, where the current and
upcoming approaches of employing sea defenses or managed realignment strategies may
benefit from SHC for its tendency to thrive in such conditions.
Conclusively, two factors are identified to interfere with crack healing in SHC: increase
in hydration that decreases porosity and subsequently restricted the healing system’s
transportation, and the likely subsequent increase in crack age, likely due to s decreased
number of viable bacteria remaining after consequent pore filling. Hence, it may be
feasible to employ mineral admixtures (SCMs) for their contribution to delayed hydration
to counteract the high initial hydration interference. The six robustness criteria established
to predict self-healing functionality may be explored further to aid in the selection of an
appropriate concrete approach for specific structural applications [47]. Preliminary aspects
must be addressed to achieve maximum compatibility of SHC with a specific structural
application such as: width and dynamic of anticipated cracking, probability and extent
of water exposure, and most importantly to tailor the mix for the specified application,
it may be useful to detail the desired SHC properties and possibly categorise targets by
priority according to subjected environment (i.e., recovery of mechanical properties, liquid
tightness, limiting crack width, etc.).

4. SHC Market Feasibility

The experimental progress of self-healing concrete is an emergent domain that lacks
in field applications where practical testing illustrates realistic structural feasibility. Gov-
ernment support for development of SHC was seen in major European projects such as
RM4L [48] and HEALCON [49]. However, the lack of industrial collaboration in the theo-
retical progress of SHC research may reduce SHC prospects and the pace of adoption in
real-life applications. Another barrier to the market adoption and upscale of SHC lies in the
short duration of experimental testing. The current approach towards commercialisation
and long-term performance prediction makes use of computer modelling to carry out
lifecycle assessments and material optimisation based on simulated output, as depicted in
Figure 2. This approach conforms to the standard of design by testing and reduces the high
costs associated with producing and testing SHC in field applications given its currently
limited understanding.

Short-term
accelerated
experiment

Material Modelled mirror of

Optimisation experiment

Simulated long-term
performance

Figure 2. Current self-healing concrete testing and development process.

Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 8 of 13

It may be deduced that a shortcoming in SHC progress towards commercialisation lies

in the restrictions associated with short- to medium-term experimental testing compensated
with accelerated tests. In addition, the persuasion of industry interest may also be hindered
due to a lack of consistent testing methods and inconclusive field tests that poorly correlate
with laboratory results, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Autonomous self-healing concrete in field applications.

SHC Test Laboratory

Field Application Findings Laboratory Field Ref.
Specimen
Wet–dry cycles ideal for visual
crack closure.
Negligible water absorption.
Regain of liquid tightness.
Direct addition of Mixed Roof slab developed condensation
Ureolytic Culture and Capillary water
anaerobic granular absorption RC prism RC roof slab drops deemed favourable for
[50]
bacteria in CEM III/B Water permeability self-healing activity.
42.5 N No cracking was observed; hence
not tested.
Direct addition not recommended
due to further mixing requirement
producing increased air content.
15.4% compressive strength increase
Lightweight aggregate in SHC sample.
containing alkali-resistant Flexural strength Linings for
testing Crack sealing after 6 months of
- [51]
bacterial healing agent irrigation canals cracking and curing.
Compressive strength
and natural fibers No cracking observed; hence
not tested.
Microcapsules reduced density and
Laboratory: uniformity of concrete, reducing
Microcapsule-based Compressive strength compressive strength.
Rapid chloride Precast concrete slab Loss of 20% in compressive strength
epoxy resin with OPC, Cube embedded structure
migration test [52]
GGBS, FA, and for tunnel application after crack healing.
expansive agent Field:
Strain monitoring Improved impermeability.
sensor No significant fluctuations in
monitored strain.
Negligible workability influence
Decreased density in
microbial concrete.
Slightly lower compressive strength
than normal concrete at 28 d.
Improved impermeability after
crack repair.
Equivalent self-healing of cracks
was observed in both normal and
microbial SHC.
Large strain measured on one wall
FA, GGBS, CEM I 42.5 Laboratory: caused 2 vertical cracks. The cracks
Laboratory: Workability were sealed after 41 d and 60 d;
Powder-based Compressive strength however, large amounts of healing
healing agent - Underground metro [39]
Field structure product seemed to leak externally.
Field: Strain and Increased temperature monitored in
Capsule-based temperature monitoring early ages, likely indicating
microbial concrete Ultrasonic testing accelerated hydration, possibly due
to capsule rupture.
Waveform distorted with cracking
and regained uniformity
upon healing.
Three cracks appeared and the best
healing methods reported in
order included:
(1) Wet burlap with nutrients
(2) Wet burlap with water
(3) Water spraying
83% of SHC samples were free
of corrosion.
RC with epoxy-coated Accelerated Reinforced Bond stress comparable to
10% wt. corrosion test mortar cylinder conventional concrete with
microencapsulated - sustained integrity of [53]
Pullout test Mortar cylinder
tung oil Compressive strength Mortar cube interfacial bonding.
SHC compressive strength was
higher than standard concrete.
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 9 of 13

Field studies where SHC was used on a newly built structure have all shown no
signs of cracking, which has disallowed the evaluation of self-healing performance on a
real-life scale. However, valuable output can be observed regarding the feasibility of mass
production of SHC for newly built structural applications. In contrast with self-healing
application in new structures, mostly successful applications are reported in using SHC
as a repair agent on existing structures and infrastructure with crack width closure and
permeability reduction. This presents an opportunity for the use of SHC to non-invasively
regenerate historical structures. The application of the SHC roof slab [50] was reported to
have imposed a requirement for extending the mixing time on site, which presented the
issue of an increased air content, concluding with a suggestion to avoid the direct addition
of healing systems into an industrial concrete mixer.
In another application for an underground structure [39], noticeable crack formation
was found within 7 days after pouring the SHC, the cracks were healed by continued
wetting; however, the healing product formed was seen leaking externally, a possible
indication of inadequate control of the extent of warranted healing response. This issue is
especially crucial for structural applications such that self-healing system incorporation
costs more than traditional concrete and, therefore, wasted product has serious economic
and durability implications. Arguably, leaking product may be due to a nonuniform or
inconsistent dispersion of capsules within the concrete matrix. This occurrence perhaps
reveals the relevance of studying the efficiency of the extent of response of self-healing upon
stimulation. Conclusively, the rapid crack formation seen in this project is concerning and
may indicate that the fresh properties of SHC require further scrutiny. This is supported
by the appearance of fluctuations at the early-age temperature and strain monitoring,
which was translated as accelerated hydration, possibly due to potential breakage of
microcapsules. Early microcapsule breakage is a common phenomenon; however, the
researchers have used capsules protected with low-alkali cement. Therefore, it is worth
noting that the standard procedures of concrete mixing and pouring may have contributed
to the inefficient self-healing functionality.
An irrevocable appeal of SHC is the noted reduction in carbon emissions. This is por-
trayed by the use of SCMs in most SHC systems where utilised cement and reinforcement
are simultatueonly reduced. However, it is challenging to quantify the estimated emission
reduction in SHC due to the wide range of composition, production and testing variability.
Nonetheless, several lifecycle assessments (LCA) have been conducted on varying SHC
systems, and Figure 3 shows a comparative illustration of environemntal impact imporve-
ments found in using SHC in respect to traditional OPC concrete. The LCA studies shown
depict the ideal minimum percentage contribution reported for a given SHC system to the
environemntal impact in relevance to traditional concrete in the majority of categories. For
simplification of analysis, Figure 3 is limited to the reportedly optimal SHC system and
notes the traditional concrete system as OPC with no reiteration of its concrete composition
and tested environmental condition.
It is worth noting that the initial environmental and economical impacts of using SHC
systems may be higher due to associated cradle-to-gate processes; therefore, some asess-
ments conclude with urging that the repair costs may be relatively diminished in efficient
SHC structures, offsetting initial costs with an overall improved lifecycle. Noticeably, a
shortcoming was found in LCA studies of SHC regarding bacterial concrete, where most
literature scopes have involved the self-healing ECC systems.
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 10 of 13

SHC Environmental Impact

100
Environmental Impact (%)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
SH-ECC [Van Polypropylene Encapsulated Sodium hydroxide
Belleghem et al., microfibres SH-ECC polyurethane-based geopolymer SHC
2016] [Van den Heede et al., healing agent RC slab [Garces et al., 2021]
2019] [Van den Heede et al.,
2018]
Concrete

SHC OPC

Figure 3. Lifecycle assessment studies of various SHC systems. (Adapted from Refs. [54–57]).

5. Future Perspective
The outlook of SHC is likely to witness an upward trend in field experimentation and
industry collaboration such that self-healing concrete acknowledges the UN Sustainable
Development Goals, namely: Goal 9 of Industry Innovation, and Infrastructure, 11 of Sus-
tainable Cities and Communities, 12 of Responsible Consumption and Production, and 13
of Climate Action. Initiatives such as The Higher Education Sustainability Initiative (HESI)
commends the important role of universities in driving the change towards sustainable
development, and several universities have implemented individually scheduled targets
of SDGs.
In comparing the two approaches, autogenous self-healing mechanisms seem more
practical due to minimal practical requirements, whereas the autonomous mechanisms of
encapsulation or vascular networks require strategic approaching. In autogenous healing,
the commercialised state of various crystalline admixtures has presented literature disparity
and experimental nonlinearity affecting its practicality and research reliability with respect
to other healing systems. Aside from the long-term hydration seen in some SCMs, autoge-
nous healing tends to be finite in comparison to the means of protection of chemical healing
agents and long-lasting bacteria found in autonomous healing. However, in autonomous
biotechnology, the embedding of the healing system within capsules or vascular networks
is not sufficient to control the risk of spontaneous triggering of self-healing and possible
requirement of water exposure and/or manmade intervention. Counteractive to this chal-
lenge, a secondary component may be added in the concrete to act as a systematic trigger
in activating healing upon cracking. The flexibility implied by this possibility transcends
the limitations of autogenous approaches where there is a restricted healable crack width
and no degree of control towards healing activation save the influence of the external
environment. However, increased costs are associated with employing nutrients; therefore,
this technique must be evaluated against the alternative SHC reliant on external conditions
to evaluate practical and economic feasibility. Arguably, it may be more practical to desig-
nate the use of secondary components in SHC to specific applications where exists a lack
of ideal environmental conditions (i.e., dry locations with no water/humidity) to trigger
healing with no external reliance. Alternative and perhaps less costly approaches towards
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 11 of 13

controlled healing may be through the use of a combination of crack-limiting ECCs typically
employed in autogenous systems with healing agents or bacteria due to proven promising
engineering properties. Moreover, for increased optionality of self-healing systems, the use
of fungus has displayed promising performance that warrants further exploration.
In advancing the commercialisation of SHC, future research must aim to address
reported shortcomings and exploit opportunities. Practically, field studies have proven
poor survivability of encapsulated systems in standard concrete mixers; hence, it may
be useful to study the feasibility of using standard concrete transport and production
practices on encapsulated SHC structural components. The vascular network technique
promises increased resilience in practical use through underway research involving 3D
printing; however, high expenses may be associated with such sophisticated technology.
As a deducible from research regarding structural application of SHC, it is necessary for
the anticipated damage mechanism to be prespecified in order to design an appropriate
self-healing system warranting the desired structural resilience. Similarly, relevant cost
analysis studies must be undertaken to understand the economical aspect of integrating
different SHC technologies in relation to the intended structural application. Relevant LCA
of bacterial concrete are scarce in existing literature and require further attention, such
that the focus was seen mostly on chemical healing agents. An appropriate direction for
research in SHC may regard the behaviour of structural components exposed to natural
environments with emphasis on non-destructive testing methods that may address the
gap of inconclusive field case studies to be a reliable prototype for industrial adoption.
Overall, future investigations of SHC must aim to utilise less variability in testing methods
to work towards standardising SHC production and testing procedures discernible to the
industry. Ultimately, SHC is a multidisciplinary endeavour ranging from microbiology
to structural engineering; hence, standardising SHC procedures for real-life practices will
require widescale technological convergence and profound cooperation.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.A. and L.D.S.; methodology, validation: D.A. and
L.D.S.; formal analysis, D.A.; investigation, D.A.; resources, L.D.S.; data curation, D.A. and L.D.S.;
writing—original draft preparation, D.A.; writing—review and editing, L.D.S.; visualization, D.A.;
supervision, L.D.S.; project administration, L.D.S.; funding acquisition, L.D.S. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ellis, L.D.; Badel, A.F.; Chiang, M.L.; Park, R.J.-Y.; Chiang, Y.-M. Toward electrochemical synthesis of cement—An electrolyzer-
based process for decarbonating CaCO3 while producing useful gas streams. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 117, 12584–12591.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Andrew, R.M. Global CO2 emissions from cement production, 1928–2018. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2019, 11, 1675–1710. [CrossRef]
3. United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report. 2021. Available online: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2021
/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2021.pdf (accessed on 12 May 2022).
4. Sunakh Zabanoot, M.S. Review of Autogenous and Autonomous self-Healing Concrete Technologies for Marine Environments.
High Perform. Optim. Des. Struct. Mater. IV 2020, 196, 31. [CrossRef]
5. Van Tittelboom, K.; De Belie, N. Self-Healing in Cementitious Materials—A Review. Materials 2013, 6, 2182–2217. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
6. Roig-Flores, M.; Serna, P. Concrete Early-Age Crack Closing by Autogenous Healing. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4476. [CrossRef]
7. Qureshi, T.; Al-Tabbaa, A. Self-healing concrete and cementitious materials. In Advanced Functional Materials; IntechOpen: London,
UK, 2020; pp. 191–213. [CrossRef]
8. Li, V.C.; Yang, E.-H. Self Healing in Concrete Materials; Springer Series in Materials Science; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands,
2007; pp. 161–193. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 12 of 13

9. Schlangen, E.; ter Heide, N.; van Breugel, K. Crack healing of early age cracks in concrete. In Measuring, Monitoring and Modeling
Concrete Properties; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 273–284. [CrossRef]
10. Thenbs.com. TR 74 Cementitious Materials: The Effect of Ggbs, Fly Ash, SILICA Fume and Limestone Fines on the Properties of
Concrete, Concrete Society—Publication Index|NBS. 2015. Available online: www.thenbs.com/PublicationIndex/documents/
details?Pub=CS&DocID=299663 (accessed on 20 May 2022).
11. Tait, M.W.; Cheung, W.M. A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess
2016, 21, 847–860. [CrossRef]
12. Oliveira, A.D.S.; Gomes, O.D.F.M.; Ferrara, L.; Fairbairn, E.D.M.R.; Filho, R.D.T. An overview of a twofold effect of crystalline
admixtures in cement-based materials: From permeability-reducers to self-healing stimulators. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 41, 102400.
[CrossRef]
13. Xue, C.; Tapas, M.J.; Sirivivatnanon, V. Cracking and Stimulated Autogenous Self-Healing on the Sustainability of Cement-Based
Materials: A review. J. Sustain. Cem.-Based Mater. 2022. Available online: https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/154415
(accessed on 17 June 2022). [CrossRef]
14. Hermawan, H.; Minne, P.; Serna, P.; Gruyaert, E. Understanding the Impacts of Healing Agents on the Properties of Fresh and
Hardened Self-Healing Concrete: A Review. Processes 2021, 9, 2206. [CrossRef]
15. Zhang, Y.; Wang, R.; Ding, Z. Influence of Crystalline Admixtures and Their Synergetic Combinations with Other Constituents on
Autonomous Healing in Cracked Concrete—A Review. Materials 2022, 15, 440. [CrossRef]
16. Geraldo, R.H.; Guadagnini, A.M.; Camarini, G. Self-healing concrete with crystalline admixture made with different cement
content. Ceramica 2021, 167, 370–377. [CrossRef]
17. Guzlena, S.; Sakale, G. Self-healing concrete with crystalline admixture—A review. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019,
660, 012057. [CrossRef]
18. De Nardi, C.; Gardner, D.; Jefferson, A.D. Development of 3D Printed Networks in Self-Healing Concrete. Materials 2020, 13, 1328.
[CrossRef]
19. Menon, R.R.; Luo, J.; Chen, X.; Zhou, H.; Liu, Z.; Zhou, G.; Zhang, N.; Jin, C. Screening of Fungi for Potential Application of
Self-Healing Concrete. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 2075. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Khushnood, R.A.; Ali, A.M.; Faraz Bhatti, M.; Ahmed Khan, H. Self-healing fungi concrete using potential strains Rhizopus
oryzae and Trichoderma longibrachiatum. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 50, 104155. [CrossRef]
21. Jin, C.; Yu, R.; Shui, Z. Fungi: A Neglected Candidate for the Application of Self-Healing Concrete. Front. Built Environ. 2018,
4, 62. [CrossRef]
22. Du Plessis, A.; Babafemi, A.J.; Paul, S.C.; Panda, B.; Tran, J.P.; Broeckhoven, C. Biomimicry for 3D concrete printing: A review and
perspective. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 38, 101823. [CrossRef]
23. Shah, K.W.; Huseien, G.F. Biomimetic Self-Healing Cementitious Construction Materials for Smart Buildings. Biomimetics 2020,
5, 47. [CrossRef]
24. Kumar, V.; Balasubramaniam, B.; Srinivasan, M.; Palani, G. An Overview of Techniques Based on Biomimetics for Sustainable
Development of Concrete. Curr. Sci. 2011. Available online: www.researchgate.net/publication/269275282_An_overview_of_
techniques_based_on_biomimetics_for_sustainable_development_of_concrete (accessed on 23 May 2022).
25. Hizami Abdullah, M.A.; Harmiza Abdullah, N.A.; Tompang, M.F. Development and Performance of Bacterial Self-healing
Concrete—A Review. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 431, 062003. [CrossRef]
26. Imad Mohammed, A.; Awadh Ba Rahman, A.; Mohd Nasir, N.A.; Bakar, N.A.; Safiee, N.A. Evaluation of the Compatibility of
Modified Encapsulated Sodium Silicate for Self-Healing of Cementitious Composites. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10847. [CrossRef]
27. Andalib, R.; Abd Majid, M.Z.; Hussin, M.W.; Ponraj, M.; Keyvanfar, A.; Mirza, J.; Lee, H.-S. Optimum concentration of Bacillus
megaterium for strengthening structural concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 118, 180–193. [CrossRef]
28. Jena, S.; Basa, B.; Panda, K.C.; Sahoo, N.K. Impact of Bacillus subtilis bacterium on the properties of concrete. Mater. Today Proc.
2020, 32, 651–656. [CrossRef]
29. Reddy, P.; Kavyateja, B. Experimental Study on Strength Parameters of Self Repairing Concrete. Ann. Chim.—Sci. Matériaux 2019,
43, 305–310. [CrossRef]
30. Vijay, K.; Murmu, M. Self-repairing of concrete cracks by using bacteria and basalt fiber. SN Appl. Sci. 2019, 1, 1344. [CrossRef]
31. Guo, S.; Chidiac, S. MAT152-1 CSCE Annual Conference Growing with Youth—Croître avec les Jeunes Laval (Greater Montreal)
Self-Healing Concrete: A Critical Review. 2019. Available online: https://www.csce.ca/elf/apps/CONFERENCEVIEWER/
conferences/2019/pdfs/PaperPDFVersion_152_0423094222.pdf (accessed on 17 June 2022).
32. Al-Tabbaa, A.; Lark, B.; Paine, K.; Jefferson, T.; Litina, C.; Gardner, D.; Embley, T. Biomimetic cementitious construction materials
for next-generation infrastructure. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.—Smart Infrastruct. Constr. 2018, 171, 67–76. [CrossRef]
33. Azarsa, P.; Gupta, R.; Biparva, A. Assessment of self-healing and durability parameters of concretes incorporating crystalline
admixtures and Portland Limestone Cement. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2019, 99, 17–31. [CrossRef]
34. Sideris, K.K.; Chatzopoulos, A.; Tassos, C.; Manita, P. Durability of concretes prepared with crystalline admixtures. MATEC Web
Conf. 2019, 289, 09003. [CrossRef]
35. Giannaros, P.; Kanellopoulos, A.; Al-Tabbaa, A. Sealing of cracks in cement using microencapsulated sodium silicate. Smart Mater.
Struct. 2016, 25, 084005. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2022, 12, 1196 13 of 13

36. Mirshahmohammad, M.; Rahmani, H.; Maleki-Kakelar, M.; Bahari, A. Effect of sustained service loads on the self-healing and
corrosion of bacterial concretes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 322, 126423. [CrossRef]
37. Litina, C.; Bumanis, G.; Angelini, G.; Dudek, M.; Maddalena, R.; Amenta, M.; Papaioannou, S.; Pérez, G.; Calvo, J.G.; Asensio,
E.; et al. Evaluation of methodologies for assessing self-healing performance of concrete with mineral expansive agents: An
interlaboratory study. Materials 2021, 14, 2024. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Ferrara, L.; Krelani, V.; Moretti, F. On the use of crystalline admixtures in cement based construction materials: From porosity
reducers to promoters of self healing. Smart Mater. Struct. 2016, 25, 084002. [CrossRef]
39. Qian, C.; Zheng, T.; Zhang, X.; Su, Y. Application of microbial self-healing concrete: Case study. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021,
290, 123226. [CrossRef]
40. Sonali Sri Durga, C.; Ruben, N.; Sri Rama Chand, M.; Venkatesh, C. Performance studies on rate of self healing in bio concrete.
Mater. Today: Proc. 2019, 27, 158–162. [CrossRef]
41. Tayebani, B.; Hosseinibalam, N.; Mostofinejad, D. Influential Effect of Self-Healing Treatment on Water Absorption and Electrical
Resistance of Normal and Light Weight Aggregate Concretes. Int. J. Civ. Environ. Eng. 2019, 13, 195–199. Available on-
line: https://publications.waset.org/10010219/influential-effect-of-self-healing-treatment-on-water-absorption-and-electrical-
resistance-of-normal-and-light-weight-aggregate-concretes#:~{}:text=As%20a%20conclusion%2C%2020%25%20increase (ac-
cessed on 17 June 2022).
42. Hussein, Z.M.; Abedali, A.H.; Ahmead, A.S. Improvement Properties of Self -Healing Concrete by Using Bacteria. IOP Conf. Ser.
Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 584, 012034. [CrossRef]
43. Shanthi, M. Strength and Water Absorption of Bacterial Concrete Prepared with M-sand—A Study. 2016. Available on-
line: https://www.ijert.org/research/strength-and-water-absorption-of-bacterial-concrete-prepared-with-m.sand-a-study-
IJERTV5IS090346.pdf (accessed on 27 May 2022).
44. Poornima, V.; Venkatasubramani, R.; Sreevidya, V.; Pavan, C.; Nourin, A. Effect of microbial solution on compressive strength,
water absorption and sorptivity of cement mortar incorporated with metakaolin. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 872, 012173.
[CrossRef]
45. Chahal, N.; Siddique, R.; Rajor, A. Influence of bacteria on the compressive strength, water absorption and rapid chloride
permeability of fly ash concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 28, 351–356. [CrossRef]
46. Huang, Y.; Wang, X.; Sheng, M.; Qin, D.; Ren, J.; Zhou, X.; Zhu, J.; Xing, F. Dynamic behavior of microcapsule-based self-healing
concrete subjected to impact loading. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 301, 124322. [CrossRef]
47. Li, V.C.; Herbert, E. Robust Self-Healing Concrete for Sustainable Infrastructure. J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 2012, 10, 207–218.
[CrossRef]
48. The University of Bath’s Research Portal. (n.d.). RM4L—Resilient Materials for Life. Available online: https://researchportal.
bath.ac.uk/en/projects/rm4l-resilient-materials-for-life (accessed on 20 May 2022).
49. Europa.eu. CORDIS|European Commission. 2022. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/309451/reporting
(accessed on 29 May 2022).
50. Van Mullem, T.; Gruyaert, E.; Caspeele, R.; De Belie, N. First Large Scale Application with Self-Healing Concrete in Belgium:
Analysis of the Laboratory Control Tests. Materials 2020, 13, 997. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
51. Sierra Beltran, M.G.; Jonkers, H.M.; Mors, R.M.; Mera-Ortiz, W. Field Application of self-healing concrete with natural fibres
as linings for irrigation canals in Ecuador. In Proceedings of the ICSHM 2015: 5th International Conference on Self-Healing
Materials, Durham, NC, USA, 22–24 June 2015; Available online: Repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:650616c5-ff06-49b4
-8db0-076df52a9ea1?collection=research (accessed on 20 May 2022).
52. Wang, X.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Fang, C.; Yu, K.; Chen, Q.; Li, T.; Han, R.; Yang, Z.; Xu, P.; et al. Laboratory and field study on the
performance of microcapsule-based self-healing concrete in tunnel engineering. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 220, 90–101. [CrossRef]
53. Chen, Y.; Xia, C.; Shepard, Z.; Smith, N.; Rice, N.; Peterson, A.M.; Sakulich, A. Self-Healing Coatings for Steel-Reinforced Concrete.
ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 3955–3962. [CrossRef]
54. Van Belleghem, B.; Van den Heede, P.; Van Tittelboom, K.; De Belie, N. Quantification of the Service Life Extension and
Environmental Benefit of Chloride Exposed Self-Healing Concrete. Materials 2016, 10, 5. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
55. Van den Heede, P.; De Belie, N.; Pittau, F.; Habert, G.; Mignon, A. Life Cycle Assessment of Self-Healing Engineered Cementitious
Composite (SH-ECC) Used for the Rehabilitation of Bridges. Available online: Core.ac.uk/display/188629730 (accessed on 20
May 2022).
56. Van den Heede, P.; Mignon, A.; Habert, G.; De Belie, N. Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of self-healing engineered cementitious
composite with in-house developed (semi-)synthetic superabsorbent polymers. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2018, 94, 166–180. [CrossRef]
57. Garces, J.I.T.; Dollente, I.J.; Beltran, A.B.; Tan, R.R.; Promentilla, M.A.B. Life Cycle Assessment of self-healing geopolymer concrete.
Clean. Eng. Technol. 2021, 4, 100147. [CrossRef]