ArticleScientific reports2024
Influence of ceramic waste powder on shear performance of environmentally friendly reinforced concrete beams.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This investigation considered the usability of ceramic waste powder (CWP) in altered quantities in reinforced concrete beams (RCBs). In this way, it was aimed to reduce the environmental impacts of concrete by using CWP as a raw material in RCBs. 12 small-scale shear RCBs with the dimensions of 100 × 150 × 1000 mm were tested in this study. The variations of stirrups spacing and CWP ratio were examined in these specimens. The percentages of CWP by weight utilized in RCBs were 10%, 20%, and 30%, and stirrups spacings were adopted as 270 mm, 200 mm, and 160 mm. At the end of the study, it was determined that more than 10% CWP additive negatively affected the RCBs' compressive strength. The load-carrying capacity reduced between 30.3% and 59.4% when CWP increased from 0% to 30% as compared to RCB with stirrups spacing of 270 mm without CWP. However, compared to RCB with stirrups spacings of 200 mm and 160 mm without CWP, there were decreases in the load-carrying capacity as 21.4%-54.3% and 18.6%-54.6%, respectively. While the CWP ratio increased, the specimens with 160 mm, 200 mm, and 270 mm stirrups spacings obtained a lower maximum load value. However, with the increase of the CWP ratio in the specimens with 160 mm stirrups spacing, RCBs reached the maximum load-carrying capacity at an earlier displacement value. When stirrups spacing was selected as 270 mm, it was observed that the maximum load-carrying capacity of RCBs reached at a similar displacement value as the CWP ratio increased. Besides, it was resulted that the bending stiffness of RCBs reduced as the quantity of CWP enhanced. The bending stiffness decreased by 29.1% to 66.4% in the specimens with 270 mm stirrups spacing, 36.3% to 20.2% with 200 mm stirrups spacing, and 10.3% to 36.9% with 160 mm stirrups spacing. As an implication of the experiments, the use of CWP up to 10% in RCBs was realized as an economical and environmental approach and is suggested. There is some evidence to report that making use of CWP may be considered to be ecologically benign. This is due to the fact that reusing CWP may significantly reduce CO
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.