ArticleACS omega2023
Analysis of the Technical Feasibility of Sustainable Concrete Production Using Waste Foundry Sand as a Fine Aggregate.
Article in ACS omega, 2023. 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.
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Waste foundation sand (WFS) is one of the most abundant residues in the foundation industry. Currently, its annual production is estimated to be three million tons. This material has properties that make it an attractive candidate for implantation as an alternative constituent to a natural fine aggregate in concrete applications. This application can promote greater sustainability, as it would establish a noble destination for the waste generated in large quantities by the metallurgical industry in addition to reducing the exploitation of a natural resource widely used by the civil construction industry. Given this, the present study observed the test of three different proportions of replacement, 25, 50, and 100% by mass, of natural sand by WFS in concrete. To assess the feasibility of these replacements, several tests were carried out covering mechanical properties and aspects related to the durability of concrete. The results indicated a significant improvement in the mechanical performance, with a resistance gain of 25% in relation to the reference concrete. As for the modulus of elasticity, there was no significant variation. As for aspects related to durability, both the absorption test and the alkali aggregate reaction test did not show statistically significant disparity, which attests to the technical feasibility of using nonconcrete WFS.
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.