Compressibility effect in evaluating the pore-size distribution of kaolin clay using mercury intrusion porosimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present research is to quantitatively evaluate the compression that can occur during the evaluation of pore-size distribution of cohesive soil using mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP). A new experimental procedure was developed that can be routinely used to evaluate the corrections associated with the compressibility for porous solid samples using MIP. The approach used in this study involves performing mercury intrusion tests on dehydrated kaolin samples using freeze-dried and oven-dried techniques, and on identical samples confined by low-porosity latex membranes. Corrections for latex intrusion and issues related to dehydration of samples are addressed. The measured contact angle of mercury with kaolin clay using the sessile drop technique was used in the data reduction. Repeatable test results were obtained throughout the testing program. The procedure for obtaining volume-change behavior under isotropic conditions for a large range of pressures using the mercury porosimeter is also presented for oven-dried samples. Scanning electron micrographs for intruded and compressed specimens are presented along with a discussion on the observed hysteresis in MIP test data. The test results for kaolin samples show substantive initial compression before the occurrence of actual intrusion. This resulted in errors associated with the interpretation of pore sizes with diameters in the range of 0.4-200 µm.Key words: mercury intrusion, clay, compression, correction, pore-size distribution, high pressure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".