Evaluation of the Mechanical Behavior of Mortars Obtained ByGeopolymerization of Calcined Clay and Demolition Mortar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geopolymeric mortars were prepared from a mixture of calcined clay powders (from demolition bricks), demolition mortar and a 12 molar alkaline hardening solution of sodium hydroxide.The geopolymeric mortars were compared physically, microstructurally and mechanically with their Portland cement counterparts.The results revealed similar densities between both types of mortars (geopolymeric and ordinary Portland cement).The microstructure was also similar in both mortars, two phases can be clearly identified, the continuous binder phase and the phase of individual fine sand particles dispersed within the continuous cement phase.Regarding the mechanical data, it could be verified that the mixture with 80 Vol.% of fine sand, 10 Vol.% of calcined clay and 10 Vol.% of demolition mortar was the one that showed the best mechanical results, with an average mechanical resistance of 34.5 MPa.However, the highest average mechanical strength value for geopolymeric mortars is below the average mechanical strength value of ordinary Portland cement mortar (50 MPa).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".