ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2022
Mechanical properties of coconut shell-based concrete: experimental and optimisation modelling.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning optimization of bio-sandcrete brick modelling using response surface methodology.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Excessive accumulation of waste materials has presented a serious environmental problem on a global scale. This has prompted many researchers to utilise agricultural, industrial, and by-product waste materials as the replacement of aggregate in the concrete matrix. In this present study, the prediction and optimisation of coconut shell (CA) content as the replacement of fine aggregate were evaluated based on the mechanical properties of the concrete (M30). Based on the suggested design array from the response surface methodology (RSM) model, experimental tests were carried out to achieve the goal of this study. The collected data was used to develop mathematical predictive equations using both GEP and RSM models. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was also taken into account to appraise and verify the performance of the proposed models. Based on the results, the optimum content of replacing CA was 50%. In particular, the compressive, tensile, and flexural strength obtained after 28 days of curing were 46.2, 3.74, and 8.06 MPa, respectively, from the RSM model and 46.18, 3.85, and 7.99 MPa, respectively, from the GEP model. The obtained values were superior to those of the control concrete sample (43.12, 3.51 and 7.14 MPa, respectively). Beyond the optimum content, a loss in strength was observed. It was also found that both the GEP and RSM models exhibited high prediction accuracy with strong correlations (R
Indexed as
Identifiers
34751882What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.