Ambient Cured Fly Ash Geopolymer Coatings for Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reinforced concrete structures that support transport, energy and urban networks in developed countries are over half a century old, and are facing widespread deterioration. Geopolymers are an affordable class of materials that have promising applications in concrete structure coating, rehabilitation and sensing, due to their high chloride, sulphate, fire and freeze-thaw resistances and electrolytic conductivity. Work to date has, however, mainly focused on geopolymers that require curing at elevated temperatures, and this limits their ease of use in the field, particularly in cooler climates. Here, we outline a design process for fabricating ambient-cured fly ash geopolymer coatings for concrete substrates. Our technique is distinct from previous work as it requires no additional manufacturing steps or additives, both of which can bear significant costs. Our coatings were tested at varying humidities, and the impacts of mixing and application methods on coating integrity were compared using a combination of calorimetry, x-ray diffraction and image-processing techniques. This work could allow geopolymer coatings to become a more ubiquitous technique for updating ageing concrete infrastructure so that it can meet modern expectations of safety, and shifting requirements due to climate change.
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 | 0.000 | 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".