Early-Age Strength and Workability of Basalt Fiber ReinforcedConcrete Made with Recycled Aggregates – A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research presents the combined effect of replacing natural aggregates by recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) and incorporating basalt fibers on the workability, 7-day compressive strength, and 7-day splitting tensile strength of concrete mixes. Three target design compressive strengths were used (30, 45, and 60 MPa). Untreated RCA were used in addition to two types of basalt fibers at volume fractions ranging from 0 to 3%. The basalt fiber types used in this work had lengths of 20 and 43 mm. Locally available desert dune sand was utilized in concrete mixes as a sustainable replacement to conventional crushed fine aggregates. The experimental results showed that the incorporation of basalt fibers resulted in a significant decrease in the workability of fresh concrete. The retention of 7day compressive strength in basalt fiber-reinforced RCA concrete was superior when the design strength was 30 MPa rather than 45 and 60 MPa. The 7-day splitting tensile strength of RCA-based concrete was effectively restored upon the addition of basalt fibers. It exceeded that of the control mixes with higher basalt fiber volume fractions and 43 mm-long basalt fibers.
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".