Randomized trial evaluates mechanical properties of cement composites with fly ash and metakaolin, suggesting improved durability under limited curing conditions.
• 15% MK offsets performance loss from shortened 7-day curing. • 15% MK mix reached 68.6 MPa 28-day compressive strength under wet curing. • Adding 15% MK increased specific electrical resistivity to 58.5 kΩ·cm. • The optimized FRCC mix with 15% MK reduced water absorption to 4.9%. • Nonlinear models predict synergistic effects of MK and curing duration. Sustainable construction with high-volume fly ash (FA) composites is often hindered by slow pozzolanic kinetics, making the material performance highly vulnerable to premature curing termination. While a 7-day wet curing period is a common industrial limit, it is scientifically insufficient for the full microstructural development of FA-rich systems. This study investigates the mechanical properties and durability of Polyvinyl Alcohol (PVA) fiber-reinforced cement composites (FRCC) containing FA and metakaolin (MK) under various curing regimes. Four mix designs (0%, 5%, 10%, and 15% MK replacement) were evaluated under 7-day, 14-day, and fully wet curing conditions. Results indicate that under ideal curing, the 15% MK mix achieved superior performance with a compressive strength of 68.6 MPa and a specific electrical resistivity of 58.5 kΩ·cm. Crucially, reducing the wet curing duration to 7 days caused a sharp decline in the performance of the control (non-MK) mixtures. However, this deficit was effectively neutralized by MK incorporation, with the 15% MK replacement providing a 'compensation effect' that resulted in superior performance even under constrained curing environments compared to non-MK composites under ideal conditions. This research establishes MK as a potent early-age accelerator and a strategic tool for ensuring composite integrity in rapid construction. Finally, nonlinear regression models were developed to provide predictive design tools for field applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
lahijani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: