Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34372097›Full record

ReviewPolymers2021

Natural Fibers as an Alternative to Synthetic Fibers in Reinforcement of Geopolymer Matrices: A Comparative Review.

Afonso R G de Azevedo, Ariana S A Cruz, Markssuel T Marvila, Leandro B de Oliveira, Sergio N Monteiro, Carlos Mauricio F Vieira, Roman Fediuk, Roman Timokhin, Nikolai Vatin, Marina Daironas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Alkali-Activated Mortars Reinforced withMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Behavior of Concrete Reinforced with Date Palm Fibers.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  15. Recyclable Materials for Ecofriendly Technology.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Supercritical COMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Afonso R G de AzevedoLECIV-Civil Engineering Laboratory, UENF-State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro, Av. Alberto Lamego, 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes 28013-602, RJ, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4694-4459
Ariana S A CruzLECIV-Civil Engineering Laboratory, UENF-State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro, Av. Alberto Lamego, 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes 28013-602, RJ, Brazil.
Markssuel T MarvilaLAMAV-Advanced Materials Laboratory, UENF-State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro, Av. Alberto Lamego, 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes 28013-602, RJ, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2162-1872
Leandro B de OliveiraLAMAV-Advanced Materials Laboratory, UENF-State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro, Av. Alberto Lamego, 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes 28013-602, RJ, Brazil.
Sergio N MonteiroDepartment of Materials Science, IME-Military Institute of Engineering, Square General Tibúrcio, 80, Rio de Janeiro 22290-270, RJ, Brazil.
Carlos Mauricio F VieiraLAMAV-Advanced Materials Laboratory, UENF-State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro, Av. Alberto Lamego, 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes 28013-602, RJ, Brazil.
Roman FediukPolytechnic Institute, Far Eastern Federal University, 690922 Vladivostok, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-2279-1240
Roman TimokhinPolytechnic Institute, Far Eastern Federal University, 690922 Vladivostok, Russia.
Nikolai VatinPeter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 St. Petersburg, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-1196-8004
Marina DaironasNorth Caucasus Branch, Belgorod State Technological University Named after V.G. Shukhov, 357202 Mineralnye Vody, Russia.

Funding

Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro E- 260.024/2020 and E 26/210.150/2019Ministry of Science and Education of the Russian Federation contract No. 075-15-2021-590 dated 04.06.2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Geopolymer materials have been gaining ground in the civil construction sector not only for having superior physical properties when compared to conventional cement, but also for being less harmful to the environment, since the synthesis of the geopolymer does not release toxic gases or require high energy costs. On the other hand, geopolymer materials like cementitious matrices have low flexural strength and have fragile breakage. To overcome these deficiencies, the insertion of fibers in geopolymeric matrices has been evaluated as a solution. Although most research on this practice focuses on the use of synthetic fibers, the use of natural fibers has been growing and brings as an advantage the possibility of producing an even more ecological material, satisfying the need to create eco-friendly materials that exists today in society. Thus, this paper aimed to, through the evaluation of research available in the literature, understand the behavior of fibers in geopolymer matrices, identify similarities and differences between the performance of geopolymer composites reinforced with natural and synthetic fibers and, understanding that it is possible, point out ways to optimize the performance of these composites.

Indexed as

geopolymer matricesnatural fiberssynthetic fibers

Identifiers

PMID34372097
PMCPMC8347070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.