ArticleScientific reports2025
Performance analysis of palm tree microfibers in concrete.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the effects of incorporating chemically treated Palm Tree Fronds (PTF) microfiber as a partial sand replacement in concrete. Concrete grades C28, C35, and C40 were evaluated with varying PTF contents ranging from 0 to 4% of sand volume. A total of 571 samples were tested using destructive and non-destructive methods to evaluate structural integrity and performance. The results revealed that PTF addition significantly enhanced workability across all grades, with higher PTF content improving slump values due to fiber-induced changes in rheological properties. Density decreased consistently, with reductions at 28 days ranging from 0.9 to 3.7% across grades, stabilizing at lower levels in higher-grade concrete. Compressive strength exhibited a linear decline with increasing PTF content, with reductions at 28 days ranging from 14.5 to 43.6% across grades, and tensile strength followed a similar trend, decreasing by 21.3% to 35.6%. Water absorption increased substantially, with an average rise from 10.6% at 1% PTF content to 51.2% at 4%, reflecting increased porosity. Thermal conductivity progressively decreased, with reductions averaging 26% to 33.6%, demonstrating enhanced insulating properties. Non-destructive tests indicated significant reductions in UPV and rebound numbers, correlating with increased fiber content and reduced matrix uniformity. SEM analysis revealed that PTF microfibers introduced porosity and microstructural discontinuities, contributing to the observed reductions in mechanical properties and increased permeability. Optimization analysis identified the optimal PTF content for balancing mechanical and thermal performance as below 1% for C28 and between 2.3% and 2.5% for higher grades. Consideration of a hybrid fiber mix, incorporating synthetic fibers such as steel, glass, or polypropylene, is recommended to compensate for the strength reduction associated with PTF addition. These findings demonstrate the potential of PTF-reinforced concrete for sustainable and energy-efficient construction, particularly in semi-structural applications.
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.