Geotechnical Performance of Recycled Glass-Waste Rock Blends in Footpath Bases
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory and field experiments were undertaken to investigate the possible application of recycled crushed glass blended with crushed basaltic waste rock as a footpath base material. The laboratory experimental program included basic and specialized geotechnical tests including particle size distribution, modified Proctor compaction, particle density, water absorption, California bearing ratio (CBR), Los Angeles abrasion, pH, organic content, and triaxial shear tests. A field demonstration footpath comprising two sections of recycled glass-waste rock blends with 15% and 30% recycled glass content and a third control section with only waste rock was subsequently constructed on the basis of the outcomes of the initial laboratory tests. Subsequently field tests with a nuclear density gauge and Clegg impact hammer were undertaken, as well as laboratory testing of field samples to assess the geotechnical performance of the trial sections. The field and laboratory test results indicated that adding crushed glass may improve the workability of the crushed waste rock base material but subsequently results in lower shear strength. The blend with 15% glass content was found to be the optimum blend, in which the material presented good workability and also had sufficiently high base strength. Higher recycled glass content (30%) resulted in borderline, though still satisfactory, performance. The research findings indicate that recycled crushed glass in blends with crushed waste rock is a potential alternative material to be used in footpath bases. A separate study is recommended to evaluate the environmental risks associated with the usage of these recycled materials.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it