CHLORIDE PENETRATION RESISTANCE OF CONCRETE SEALER AND COATING SYSTEMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the chloride penetration resistance of a silane-based sealer (SS1), an acrylic-based coating (AC1), and two cementitious coatings (CC1 and CC2) when applied on concrete surface. Concrete powder samples were collected from 15, 30 and 45 mm depths of sealer and coating treated concrete prism specimens, which were exposed to H2O and de-icing solutions of NaCl, Geomelt S30, MgCl2 and CaCl2 for 100 freeze-thaw cycles followed by 25 wet-dry cycles. Chloride analysis was carried out to determine the total water-soluble chlorides of concrete. Test results revealed that the chloride penetration for exposure to the de-icing chemicals occurred at a depth of 15 mm from the concrete surface. The highest chloride penetration occurred for the non-treated concrete. The sealer ‘SS1’ exhibited good performance except with exposure to NaCl solution. Among the three different coating products, the acrylic-based coating ‘AC1’ was the best-performing coating, whereas the cementitious coating ‘CC1’ had the worst performance. The amount of penetrated water-soluble chlorides was greater than the maximum recommended value of 0.025% (by concrete weight) at 15 mm depth for the sealer ‘SS1’ when exposed to NaCl de-icing solution, and for the coating ‘CC1’ when exposed to NaCl, CaCl2 and MgCl2 solutions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".