Use of waste glass in cement-based materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Demand for recycled glass has considerably decreased in recent years, particularly for mixed-glass. Glass is cheaper to store than to recycle, as conditioners require expenses for the recycling process. There are several alternatives for the reuse of composite-glass. According to previous studies, all these applications, which require pre-conditioning and crushing, are more or less limited and unable to absorb all the quantities of waste glass available. In order to provide a sustainable solution to glass storage, a potential and incentive way would be to reuse this type of glass in concretes.Depending on the size of the glass particles used in concrete, two antagonistic behaviours can be observed: alkali-silica reaction, which involves negative effects, and pozzolanic reaction, improving the properties of concrete. The work undertaken here dealt with the use of fine particles of glass and glass aggregates in mortars, either separately or combined. Two parameters based on standardised tests were studied: pozzolanic assessment by mechanical tests on mortar samples and alkali-reactive aggregate characteristics and fines inhibitor evaluations by monitoring of dimensional changes. It is shown that there is no need to use glass in the form of fines since no swelling due to alkali-silica reaction is recorded when the diameter of the glass grains is less than 1mm. Besides, fine glass powders having specific surface areas ranging from 180 to 540m² / kg reduce the expansions of mortars subjected to alkali-silica reaction (especially when glass aggregates of diameters larger than 1 mm are used). La demande pour le verre recyclé a chuté considérablement au cours de ces dernières années plus particulièrement pour le verre mixte. Parce qu’entreposer le verre mixte revient moins cher que son recyclage, les conditionneurs exigent, depuis quelques années, des frais pour le recycler. Actuellement, plusieurs centres de tri refusent de payer des frais pour acheminer le verre mixte auprès des conditionneurs et par conséquent, la plupart d’entre eux accumulent ce type de verre.Plusieurs alternatives de réutilisation de verre mixte existent. Une fois conditionné, ce verre peut être utilisé dans la fabrication de la laine de verre, les filtrations municipales et de piscines, l’abrasion au jet …etc.D’après des études faites tous ces débouchés, qui nécessitent un pré-conditionnement, y compris un broyage, sont plus au moins limités et ne parviennent pas à absorber ces quantités de verre récupérées. Afin d’apporter une solution durable à la problématique de verre entreposé, une autre piste potentielle et encourageante, consiste à le valoriser dans les bétons.Une fois utilisé dans le béton et en fonction de sa grosseur, il a été montré que le verre peut conduire à deux types de comportement à conséquences complètements antagonistes : la réaction alcali-silice entraînant des effets néfastes et la réaction pouzzolanique bénéfique pour la structure.Ce travail, traite de l’utilisation des fines et des granulats de verre dans des mortiers, tantôt utilisés séparément tantôt combinés. Deux paramètres basés sur des essais normalisés ont été étudiés : l’évaluation de la pouzzolanicité par des essais mécaniques sur éprouvettes de mortiers et l’évaluation des caractères alcali-réactif des granulats et inhibiteur des fines par suivi de variations dimensionnelles.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".