Hygrothermal and Mechanical Behaviors of Fiber Mortar: Comparative Study between Palm and Hemp Fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an experimental investigation of the hygrothermal and mechanical properties of innovative mortar mixtures reinforced with natural fibers. Fibers extracted from palm stems (PS) and hemp (HF) were evaluated at different percentages. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations showed that the PS fibers have rough surfaces and very complex microstructures. Prior to their incorporation into the mortar, the fibers were subjected to different treatments to reduce their hydrophilic character. The employed treatments showed good efficiency in reducing the water absorption of both PS and HF fiber types. Furthermore, the mortar mixtures incorporating these fibers exhibited low thermal conductivity and excellent moisture buffering capacity. Indeed, the moisture buffer value (MBV) of the investigated mixtures ranged between 2.7 [g/(%HR·m2)] and 3.1 [g/(%HR·m2)], hence providing them excellent moisture regulator character. As expected, the fiber mortar mixtures showed very high porosity and low compressive strength ranging between 0.6 and 0.9 MPa after 28 days of age. The low-environmental footprint materials developed in this study are intended for thermal insulation and building filling.
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".