Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40615442›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Investigating the correlation between ultrasonic pulse velocity and compressive strength in polyurethane foam concrete.

R Roobankumar, M SenthilPandian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R RoobankumarSchool of Civil Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, 600127, Tamil Nadu, India.
M SenthilPandianSchool of Civil Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, 600127, Tamil Nadu, India. senthilpandian.m@vit.ac.in.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using waste polyurethane foam as a partial replacement for natural coarse aggregates in concrete provides an eco-friendly solution by reducing waste and conserving natural resources. However, the strength behavior of polyurethane foam concrete differs from conventional concrete. To ensure effective design and quality control in the field, the viability of non-destructive testing methods for finding out the in situ mechanical properties of polyurethane foam concrete must be evaluated. This study establishes a correlation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test to predict the compressive strength of polyurethane foam concrete using UPV test results. An experimental study was conducted on concrete specimens with varying percentages of polyurethane foam replacing natural coarse aggregate, ranging from 10 to 60% in 10% increments. The control concrete mix was 100% natural coarse aggregate without polyurethane foam. The properties of the specimens were evaluated after curing for 7, 14, and 28 days. It also examines polyurethane foam concrete workability, density, and microstructural properties. The findings show that the UPV and compressive strength of polyurethane foam concrete were lower than those of the control mix concrete for all replacement levels and curing ages. The empirical relationships between compressive strength and UPV were found to be exponential, with high correlation values ranging from 0.9012 to 0.9998. The predicted values and the experimentally measured results were compared in order to confirm the accuracy of the empirical equations for compressive strength prediction.

Indexed as

Compressive strengthConcreteCorrelationsPolyurethane foam wasteUltrasonic pulse velocity

Identifiers

PMID40615442
PMCPMC12227554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.