ArticleScientific reports2025
Synergistic effects of rice husk ash and extracted microsilica on the performance of high-strength 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The construction industry's urgent need for sustainable alternatives to ordinary Portland cement (OPC) has spurred significant interest in supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). Therefore, this study investigates the synergistic effects of rice husk ash (RHA) and extracted microsilica (EMS) as partial replacements for cement in high-strength concrete (HSC). RHA was produced by controlled combustion of rice husk (RH) at 600-700 °C, while EMS was obtained through an optimized extraction process. Along with control mix (CM), three ternary mixes incorporating 15-35% RHA and 5-15% EMS were investigated to evaluate their effects on the mechanical and durability properties, as well as microstructural characteristics. Experimental results demonstrated that samples containing 20% (5% EMS + 15% RHA) and 35% (10% EMS + 25% RHA) as cement replacement exhibited enhanced performance, increasing the 28-day compressive strength by 11.56% and 5.98%, respectively, as compared to conventional concrete. Durability assessments of the optimal mixes revealed a significant reduction in water absorption (WA) and permeability. Physiochemical characterization confirmed the increased formation of dense calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) gels and a reduction in portlandite content, indicating high pozzolanic reactivity. However, the 50% replacement mix (15% EMS + 35% RHA) showed inferior performance due to the particle agglomeration and higher porosity. This study shows that the strategically formulated combinations of EMS and RHA blends (up to 35%) can produce sustainable HSC with improved mechanical properties and durability while mitigating environmental impacts. These findings provide valuable insights for advancing eco-friendly construction materials, supporting global sustainability initiatives in infrastructure development.
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.