MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanical and Freeze-Thaw Durability Properties of Recycled Aggregate Concrete Made with Recycled Coarse Aggregate

2015· article· en· W2044943190 on OpenAlexaff
Sumaiya Binte Huda, M. Shahria Alam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials in Civil Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDurabilityAggregate (composite)Compressive strengthMaterials scienceCuring (chemistry)Composite materialYoung's modulusProperties of concreteElastic modulus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of recycled coarse aggregates (RCAs) on the fresh, hardened, and freeze-thaw durability properties of recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) is investigated in the research reported in this paper. Four different mixes were considered with natural aggregate and three different replacement levels of RCA [i.e., (1) 30%, (2) 40%, and (3) 50%]. The fresh and hardened properties of RAC were investigated according to national standards where the target strength was 35 MPa in 56 days. The compressive strengths of different concrete mixes were determined after 3, 7, 28, 56, and 120 days of moist curing. The results are also presented in terms of stress-strain curves, modulus of elasticity, and Poisson’s ratio. Freeze-thaw durability performance of RAC was studied in accordance with a national standard. This paper shows that the performance of RAC slightly decreases with increasing RCA replacement levels; however, their overall performance is comparable to natural aggregate concrete (NAC). This paper indicates that the use of RCA in new concrete production can lead to a greener environment and pave the way for sustainable construction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations197
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials in Civil EngineeringSame topicRecycled Aggregate Concrete PerformanceFrench-language works237,207