MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Saccharide Set Retarders on the Hydration of Ordinary Portland Cement and Pure Tricalcium Silicate

2009· article· en· W1970674216 on OpenAlexaff
Linghong Zhang, Lionel J. J. Catalan, Raymond J. Balec, Andrew Larsen, Hassan Haji Esmaeili, Stephen D. Kinrade

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCementSorbitolPortland cementChemistrySucroseHydrateCalcium hydroxideSugarCalciumRetarderPrecipitationCalcium silicateXylitolCalcium silicate hydrateNuclear chemistryMineralogyChemical engineeringOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceMetallurgyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of aliphatic sugar alcohols (e.g., threitol, xylitol, sorbitol) on the hydration of tricalcium silicate (C 3 S) and ordinary portland cement (OPC) were investigated and compared with those of sucrose, a well‐established cement set retarder. Only sugar alcohols which contain threo diol functionality retarded the setting of C 3 S and OPC, their efficacy increasing with the number of threo hydroxy pairs and, to a smaller extent, with the overall population of hydroxy groups. None, however, were as effective as sucrose. The initial and final setting times increased exponentially with the concentration of saccharide, although the hydration of OPC was less inhibited than that of C 3 S. Saccharides function as “delayed accelerators,” that is, cement hydration is first inhibited and then proceeds faster than in saccharide‐free cement. This behavior is consistent with the theory that the induction period is controlled by slow formation and/or poisoning of the stable calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) nuclei. The early inhibiting influence of saccharides on CSH precipitation is apparently stronger than on the growth of crystalline calcium hydroxide. Saccharides did not negatively affect the degree of hydration and compressive strength of fully set OPC paste; on the contrary, sorbitol yielded modest increases.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Ceramic SocietySame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207