ArticleScientific reports2025
Structural and environmental impacts of concrete quality a comparative life cycle assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two concrete residential buildings built in Tehran that had the same structural system and differed only in the strength of the concrete were studied. The first building had a concrete strength of 25 MPa. In the second building, the inappropriate quality of the concrete, which is related to the water-to-cement (w/c) ratio caused a decrease in the concrete strength to 20 MPa. The lateral bearing capacity of the two buildings was calculated using non-linear static pushover analysis. ISO standards and SimaPro9.1.1.7 software were used to assess the potential damage, environmental pollution produced, and construction energy used by the two concrete structures. The life cycle assessment (LCA) method was applied using a cradle-to-gate approach. The results indicated that to reach a single structural performance level, the concrete with 20 MPa strength caused 31.8% more damage and environmental pollution than the concrete with 25 MPa strength. Also, 31.8% more energy was consumed to produce the 20-MPa concrete. Pushover analysis indicated that the 25-MPa concrete structure had 20-29% greater elastic strength and almost 16% greater inelastic strength compared to the structure built with 20-MPa concrete. The building with 20 MPa concrete strength experienced a 34.8% greater displacement than the building with 25 MPa strength under shear loading. These results confirm that the structure with 20 MPa concrete strength was more vulnerable than 25 MPa concrete strength.
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.