Sustainable concrete production with recycled concrete wash water beneficiated with CO2
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A significant amount of wastewater is generated through the cleaning of equipment utilized within the ready mixed concrete production cycle. The reuse of concrete wash water as mix water is limited by the negative material performance impacts associated with the suspended solids; the effects are exacerbated with increasing solids contents and water aging. A novel carbon dioxide treatment to allow the use of high solids wash water (specific gravity 1.10) as mix water was examined. Seven batches of concrete were produced and compared: a reference mix, two batches with untreated wash water and four batches with CO2 treated wash water. The carbon dioxide treatment mineralized CO2 at 28% by mass of the treated solids. Acceptable concrete was produced through adjusting admixtures for workability. The compressive strength at 1, 7, 28 and 56 days was improved relative to both the reference and the concrete produced with untreated wash water. The suspended solids containing mineralized CO2 served as a viable cement replacement. The avoided cement and bound carbon dioxide served to lower the carbon impact of the concrete by about 14%. The approach allows three waste streams (CO2, wash water and wash water solids) to be reused to produce more sustainable concrete.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it