ArticleScientific reports2025
Optimizing recycled aggregate concrete performance with chemically and mechanically activated fly ash in combination with coconut fiber.
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 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.
- Compressive strength prediction of coconut fiber reinforced concrete using PSO optimized explainable machine learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Data-driven optimisation of sustainable high-performance concrete incorporating SCMs, biomass ash, and graphene nanoplatelets.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Sustainable concrete: investigating the synergistic effects of coconut fiber, wheat straw ash, and silica fume on RAC strength and durability.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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a matter of fact, although RCA is inferior to that of NA (natural aggregate) in terms of performance, RCA is currently being used extensively in concrete production as a sustainable solution due to global increasing construction waste. To overcome these limitations, several mechanisms and supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) have been investigated in the recent past. This study investigates the combined effect of natural fiber coconut (0%, 0.5%,1%,1.5% and 2%) and activated fly ash (mechanically and chemically) on performance of recycled concrete aggregate (RCA). Four concrete compositions were studied: a control group with varying RCA percentages and no fly ash, second group with 30% inactive fly ash, third group with 30% mechanically activated fly ash, and a fourth group with 30% chemically activated fly ash. The findings revealed that the addition of 30% chemically activated fly ash with 1.5% CF increased compressive strength by 25%, tensile strength by 17% for 100% RCA mix, While strength losses for the same mix are 7.18% after one month and 22.14% after three months of acid exposure. Scanning electron microscopy further validates the enhanced packing density and effective crack filling in the optimized mixes, highlighting their superior performance. This approach holds significant potential for advancing sustainable development pathways in high-performance structural concrete, particularly in regions prioritizing green building solutions.
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.