Experimental investigation demonstrates improved mechanical strength and durability in self-curing concrete with twenty percent pumice, highlighting water-efficient construction options.
The increasing demand for water-efficient construction has strengthened interest in self-curing concrete (SCC), particularly for arid and water-scarce environments. This study evaluates the combined use of polyethylene glycol-400 (PEG-400) and pumice as an internal-curing strategy under ambient curing. Four SCC mixtures were prepared with pumice replacing 0%, 20%, 40%, and 60% of conventional coarse aggregate, while PEG-400 was maintained at 1% by mass of cement. Workability, compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, flexural strength, water absorption, sorptivity, rapid chloride permeability, chemical resistance, and microstructural characteristics were investigated. The 20% pumice mixture gave the highest reported mechanical performance among the four investigated replacement levels, with strength increases of approximately 10–17% relative to the 0% pumice mixture. Durability comparisons were performed for the 0% and 20% mixtures and indicated lower water absorption, sorptivity, and chloride-ion transport for the 20% mixture. XRD, FTIR, SEM, and EDAX observations were consistent with enhanced hydration and pore refinement at moderate pumice replacement. Because PEG-400 was fixed at 1% and PEG-only, pumice-only, and factorial control mixtures were not included, the study does not statistically establish a PEG–pumice interaction or synergy; the results instead identify the best-performing composition among the investigated mixtures. The findings support the potential of pumice-based self-curing SCC for water-scarce construction, while highlighting the need for replicate-level statistical analysis, broader durability testing, and intermediate replacement levels in future work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sundaramoorthy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: