Effectiveness of a Natural Pozzolanic Material from Southern Saskatchewan for Cement Replacement in Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pozzolans are a category of supplementary cementitious materials that can be used as a partial replacement of portland cement in concrete. Aside from their environmental benefits, some pozzolans have been found to increase the strength, reduce the permeability, and thereby increase the durability of concrete. In this study, a natural pozzolanic material from deposits in Southern Saskatchewan was evaluated for its effectiveness as a partial replacement of portland cement in the production of concrete. Specimens with replacement amounts of 10%, 20%, and 30% by weight of cement were prepared and tested to measure compressive strength and permeability, along with a reference mix without pozzolan for comparison. The effect of sieving out particle sizes greater than 74 μm was investigated. The results showed that the 10% and 20% replacement amounts slowed down the strength development, but produced long-term compressive strengths at greater than six months that did not differ significantly from that of the reference mix, except when pozzolan particle sizes were not limited to less than 74 μm at the 20% replacement amount. The 30% replacement amount produced concrete that was weaker than the control mix by 16% and 8% at 56 days and one year, respectively, when the particle size was controlled. The permeability of samples prepared with 10% pozzolan was statistically lower than that of the reference mix and was also statistically lower when pozzolan particle sizes were limited to less than 74 μm. The natural pozzolan is therefore considered to be an effective cement replacement material.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".