ArticleScientific reports2025
Optimizing concrete sustainability with bagasse ash and stone dust and its impact on mechanical properties and durability.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable AI-based optimization framework for sustainable fly ash concrete design.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Utilization of Municipal Solid Waste Ash in Concrete Blends in Israel Part B: Combustion in a Semi-Industrial Incinerator.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Machine learning-driven optimization of compressive and tensile strength in concrete with GGBS, eggshell powder, and waste glass powder.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Lactic Acid Production from Sugarcane Bagasse Hydrolysates byACS omega · 2025Article
- Mechanical and environmental performance of sugarcane Bagasse Ash from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in sustainable concrete.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Addressing environmental challenges such as pollution and resource depletion requires innovative industrial and municipal waste management approaches. Cement production, a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, highlights the need for eco-friendly building materials to combat global warming and promote sustainability. This study evaluates the simultaneous use of Sugarcane Bagasse Ash (SCBA) and Stone Dust (SD) as partial replacements by volume for cement and sand, respectively, at varying ratios in eco-strength concrete mixes designed for 28 MPa (ES-28) and 34 MPa (ES-34), emphasizing their economic and environmental benefits. The influence of SCBA and SD on workability, mechanical properties, and durability were experimentally investigated. Results reveal that for ES-28, with 9% SCBA and 50% SD, compressive and tensile strengths were nearly equal to the control mix, while flexural strength improved by 6.86%. For ES-34, with 9% SCBA and 50% SD, compressive strength was enhanced by 10.16%, tensile strength by 11.68%, and flexural strength by 5.22%, compared to the control mix. This improvement is attributed to pozzolanic reactions, enhanced particle packing, and optimal curing conditions. However, water absorption increased significantly, with ES-28 showing a 31.61% rise and ES-34 a 22.32% rise when SCBA was 9% and SD was 50%. These results highlight the trade-offs between mechanical performance and durability. The optimized mix, derived from response surface analysis, demonstrates significant potential as a sustainable alternative to conventional concrete, aligning with environmental and structural performance objectives.
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.