Sugarcane Bagasse Ash as Partial Cement Replacement in Concrete: A Research Paper and Proposed Experimental Programme

Abstract

Sugarcane bagasse ash (SCBA) is an agro-industrial residue with a high silica content that has been studied as a partial replacement for cement. This paper evaluates published evidence on SCBA as a cement replacement and proposes a controlled concrete testing programme. One published M30 dataset is reproduced as new graphs with its replacement basis preserved. In that dataset, 28 day compressive strength was 38.95 MPa for the control and 37.48 MPa at 10% replacement (a 3.77% reduction), falling to 25.36 MPa at 20%. Splitting tensile strength changed from 3.32 to 3.34 MPa and flexural strength from 3.82 to 3.89 MPa at 10%, differences too small to separate from specimen scatter. A 7 day compressive strength gain of 21.24% at 10% did not persist to 28 days. Other studies report best replacement levels of 5%, 10% or 15%, and one reports strength loss at 20% and 40%. These contrasting observations show that ash preparation, fineness and mix design govern the outcome, so a universal benefit cannot be assumed. The proposed programme compares as received sieved ash with calcined and ground ash at three replacement levels against plain concrete, using independent batches with mechanical and durability measurements. No original specimens were prepared for this manuscript and no original experimental results are claimed.

Introduction

The paper investigates the potential use of Sugarcane Bagasse Ash (SCBA) as a partial replacement for cement in concrete to reduce cement consumption, utilize agricultural waste, and promote sustainable construction.

Sugarcane bagasse is the fibrous residue left after extracting juice from sugarcane. When burned as boiler fuel, it produces sugarcane bagasse ash, which contains silica and may exhibit pozzolanic properties. The research focuses specifically on replacing cement by mass while keeping the total binder content constant.

The main objectives of the study are to:

• Evaluate the effect of different SCBA replacement percentages on concrete strength.

• Compare untreated ash with calcined and ground ash.

• Measure workability, compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, flexural strength, and water absorption.

• Identify an appropriate cement replacement percentage without significantly affecting concrete performance.

The literature review examines previous studies and reports that the optimum SCBA replacement level varies between approximately 5% and 15%, depending on ash processing, mixture proportions, and experimental conditions. Ash properties such as fineness, calcination temperature, and silica content significantly influence its performance.

Published experimental results indicate that 10% SCBA replacement provides the most promising overall strength performance among the tested replacement levels in the reported dataset. At 10% replacement, compressive strength reaches 37.48 MPa compared with 38.95 MPa for conventional concrete. Splitting tensile strength and flexural strength are slightly higher than the control mixture. Water absorption also decreases from 11.60% to 5.68%.

However, higher replacement levels, particularly 15% and 20%, result in noticeable reductions in mechanical strength. This suggests that excessive cement replacement may reduce the binding capacity of concrete.

The proposed research aims to conduct controlled experiments using the same ash source and concrete mix design to determine whether calcination and grinding improve SCBA performance.

Conclusion

Published studies support investigating SCBA as a partial cement replacement, but they do not justify a universal strength improvement claim. The dataset reproduced here shows the best result at 10% replacement, with a small 28 day compressive deficit, tensile and flexural values close to the control, an early age compressive gain and the lowest water absorption, followed by clear losses at 15 and 20%. Other studies place the best level anywhere from 5 to 15%, and one reports strength loss at 20 and 40%. Preserving each study\'s conditions and replacement basis is essential to interpreting these results. The next defensible step is a controlled seven mixture experiment using characterised ash, as received and calcined and ground, explicit moisture and workability control, independent batches and both mechanical and durability indicators. A candidate replacement level should be selected only after measured trade offs are evaluated. On present evidence, replacement of roughly 5 to 10% of cement by well processed SCBA is the range most worth testing, and higher levels should be treated as unproven.

References

[1] Khatun, A., Reddy, V. P., Chandrashekar, R., Sravanthi, Kumar, M., and Kumar, C. V. Experimental Analysis of Sugarcane Bagasse Ash Behavior as a Partial Replacement for Cement in Concrete Mix. E3S Web of Conferences, 596, 01024, 2024. DOI 10.1051/e3sconf/202459601024. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202459601024 Read for the paired strength and absorption dataset. Full text was accessed. Check its text against its tables before reuse. [2] Sugarcane Bagasse Ash as Partial Replacement of Cement in Concrete Production. Thesis record, Addis Ababa University (ash from Wonji sugar factory). Author and year require confirmation from the repository record. https://etd.aau.edu.et/items/618c9a78-a55e-481e-aa2f-7e7c013da188/full Read for the 5% finding and absorption trend. Abstract accessed 21 October 2026. [3] Study on sugarcane bagasse ash as a partial replacement of cement in concrete water storage tanks. Busitema University repository record. Title wording, author and year require confirmation. https://ir.busitema.ac.ug/handle/20.500.12283/899 Read for the 15% limit and the sugar addition arm. Abstract accessed 21 October 2026. [4] Partial Replacement of Cement with Sugarcane Waste Ash in Cement Concrete. Kabale University repository record. Author and year require confirmation. https://idr.kab.ac.ug/items/d81817c0-b121-4792-821d-bfef7676a231 Read for the 15% limit and the C25 shortfall at 20%. Abstract accessed 21 October 2026. [5] Sugarcane bagasse ash in the compressive strength of concrete. UCV HACER Revista de Investigación y Cultura, 7(3), Universidad César Vallejo, 2018. Author names require confirmation from the publisher record. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/6793562.pdf Read as a contrasting result with strength loss. Abstract accessed 21 October 2026. [6] Bituin, J. C. Investigation on the effect of crystalline sugarcane bagasse ash (SCBA) as additive on the compressive strength of concrete. Undergraduate thesis, University of the Philippines Los Baños, 2015. https://www.ukdr.uplb.edu.ph/etd-undergrad/3939 Read for the additive route and the slump trend. Thesis source with lower evidential weight. [7] Mansaneira, E. C., Schwantes-Cezario, N., Sandoval, G. F. B., and Toralles, B. M. Sugar cane bagasse ash as a pozzolanic material. Dyna, 84(201), 163 to 171, 2017. DOI 10.15446/dyna.v84n201.61409. https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v84n201.61409 Read for calcination at 600 °C and the need for grinding. Abstract and snippets accessed. [8] Xu, Q., Ji, T., Gao, S.-J., Yang, Z., and Wu, N. Characteristics and Applications of Sugar Cane Bagasse Ash Waste in Cementitious Materials. Materials, 12(1), 39, 2019. DOI 10.3390/ma12010039. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12010039 Read for the factors governing pozzolanic activity. Review article. [9] Moulya, V., Vishwanatha, K. R., Rathan, K. A., and Sucharitha, K. Usage potential of bagasse ash as a substitute material for cement concrete. Project report sponsored by KSCST, Visvesvaraya Technological University. https://www.kscst.org.in/sppArchive/public/show/abs/036/6930 Read for the fine aggregate route. Abstract accessed 21 October 2026. [10] Jayadeva, Sujay Mugaloremutt, A. K. Gnanasekar, Prashant Sunagar, N. Harshith, Sahil Sanjeev Salvi, and Ashok Kumar. “Analysis of Smart City Environment by Artificial Intelligent Techniques.” AIP Conference Proceedings 2831(1), 2023. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0164209. [11] Natarajan, Suganya, Syed Hamim Jeelani, Prashant Sunagar, Sushilkumar Magade, Sahil Sanjeev Salvi, and Sumanta Bhattacharya. “Investigating Conventional Concrete Using Rice Husk Ash (RHA) as a Substitute for Finer Aggregate.” Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2272(1), 2022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2272/1/012030. [12] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev, and Samiksha Shridhar Kerkar. “Quality Assurance and Quality Control for Project Effectiveness in Construction and Management.” International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology 9(2): 26–29, 2020. https://doi.org/10.17577/ijertv9is020028. [13] Salvi, Sahil. “A Review: Lifecycle Assessment of a Building by Using BIM.” International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology 10(1): 699–704, 2022. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2022.39901. [14] Salvi, Sahil. “Safety Management and Accident Prevention.” International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology 9(5): 539–543, 2021. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2021.34163. [15] Salvi, Sahil, Sudarshan Bobade, Anuja Rajgopalan, and Suraj Ahire. “Morphometric Analysis of Sina River Basin at Midsangavi Using RS & GIS.” European Chemical Bulletin 12(5): 2630–2652, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48047/ecb/2023.12.si5.259. [16] Salvi, Sahil, Harish Tiwari, Shubhangi Ambad, and Jyoti Gaikwad. “Geoinformatics-Driven Analysis for Watershed Management: Focus on the Manjara River Basin.” Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels 73(2): 285–294, 2025. https://doi.org/10.18311/jmmf/2025/47423. [17] Salvi, Sahil, and Abhay Karanjkar. “Spatial Morphometric Profiling and Watershed Assessment of the Pavana River Basin in Western Maharashtra.” Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 1–10, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-026-12509-0. [18] Salvi, Sahil, Abhijit Patil, Sejal Mhetre, Yamini Patil, and Anand Shinde. “Lifecycle Assessment of Residential Building Using BIM.” Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research 14(5): 1347–1357, 2022. [19] Salvi, Sahil, and Premchand Patil. “A Case Study on Sewage Treatment Plant 1.” International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 9(5): 4216, 2021. [20] Salvi, Sahil S. “A Fibre Based Waste Fishnet Sheet Replacement with Asbestos.” European Chemical Bulletin 12(5): 2666–2670, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48047/ecb/2023.12.si5.261. [21] Salvi, Sahil S. “Experimental Investigation on Water Treated.” European Chemical Bulletin 12(5): 2653–2665, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48047/ecb/2023.12.si5.260. [22] Salvi, Sahil S., Harish U. Tiwari, and Sudarshan S. Bobade. “Integrated IoT System for Real-Time Air Quality Assessment in Diverse Environments.” International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Scope 6(1): 1362–1372, 2025. https://doi.org/10.47857/irjms.2025.v06i01.02831. [23] Salvi, Sahil, Ranjeet Sabale, Sudarshan Bobade, and Arun Dhawale. “Innovative Use of Eco-Enzymes for Domestic Wastewater Purification.” Journal of Environmental Nanotechnology 13(3): 435–439, 2024. https://doi.org/10.13074/jent.2024.09.242771. [24] Salvi, Sahil, Sahil Sanjeev Salvi, Premchand Patil, Pritam Ranpise, and Manoj Chetwani. “Rings Railway for Pune City.” International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 9(3): 2738–2746, 2021. [25] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev. “Experimental Investigation in Bond Strength in Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete.” International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education 3(2), 2017. [26] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev. “A Study of Waste Plastic Used in Paving Block.” International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 9(5): 701–706, 2021. [27] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev, Srinath Avinash Chavan, Akash Rajesh Dangat, Siddhart Shital Kore, and Swapnil Maruti. “Experimental Investigation by Use of Granite Fine Waste in Concrete.” International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 9(5): 694–700, 2021. [28] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev, S. Mukhopadhyay, S. D. Ranade, and Anuja Rajagopalan. “Morphometric Analysis of River Drainage Basin/Watershed Using GIS and RS: A Review.” International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology 5(V): 503–508, 2017. [29] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev, S. Mukhopadhyay, S. D. Ranade, and Anuja Rajagopalan. “Morphometric Analysis of River Drainage Basin/Watershed Using GIS and RS: A Review.” IJRASET 5(V): 503–508, 2017. [30] Salvi, Sahil Sanjeev, Suvasish Mukhopadhyay, Anuja Rajgopalan, S. D. Ranade, P. G. Student, Water Resource Engineering, and College Engineering. “Morphometric Analysis and Prioritization of Vashishthi Watershed.” International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education 3: 2885–2892, 2017. [31] Salvi, Sahil, Harish Tiwari, and Sudarshan Bobade. “Morphometric Evaluation of Manjara Watershed, Latur District, Maharashtra, India: A GIS Approach.” Innovative Infrastructure Solutions 10(3): 1–10, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-025-01862-w. [32] Salvi, Sahil, Harish Tiwari, Sudarshan Bobade, Ranjeet Sabale, and Sandhya Somwanshi. “Water Quality Evaluation of Pawna River Using QUAL2E Software.” Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels 73(2): 295–305, 2025. https://doi.org/10.18311/jmmf/2025/47432.

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Mr. Abhijeet Vitthal Jallewar, Mr. Omraje Anil Bhere, Prof. Sahil Sanjeev Salvi. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.