ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
A Comparative Study on Hygric Properties and Compressive Strength of Ceramic Bricks.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Growth strategy of aerial green algae on building materials in the temperate climate zone and its relevance to substrate biodeterioration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Characterization of Bricks from Baroque Monuments in Northeastern Poland: A Comparative Study of Hygric Behavior and Microstructural Properties for Restoration Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Analysis of the Technical Condition of a Late 19th Century Public Building in Łódź.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This article analyzes the results of capillary rise, compressive strength and water absorption tests on solid ceramic bricks from existing structures and demolition materials taken from 11 different structures. In addition (for more extensive interpretation and evaluation of porosity), tests were performed for the selected series of bricks using a mercury porosimeter (MIP) and a micro computed tomography (micro-CT). Contemporary bricks (2 series) were also evaluated for comparison purposes. The conducted tests indicate that bricks obtained from different sources are characterized by "individual" relation of compressive strength and porosity, and "individual" relation of water absorption coefficient and porosity. In addition, on the basis of the results obtained in the study, compared with the literature data, it can be deduced that ceramic bricks with a water absorption coefficient of less than 50 g/m
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.