Sustainable application of coal bottom ash as fine aggregates in concrete: A comprehensive review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The significant sustainability awareness in the construction industry coupled with the need for the industry to reduce its negative environmental impacts has resulted in the use of various industrial wastes in construction applications such as in the production of concrete. Various industrial wastes can be utilized as partial or total replacements for some components in concrete. Such industrial waste that can be utilized as fine aggregate in the production of concrete is coal bottom ash (CBA). Various studies have utilized CBA as fine aggregate in various types of concrete including high-strength concrete and there has been significant interest in the continuous use of CBA in concrete. To propel more application of CBA in various concrete types and to increase the understanding of the effect of the CBA on the properties of concrete, this comprehensive review was carried out. The properties explored are fresh, mechanical, durability and microstructural properties of concrete incorporating varying proportions of CBA. Findings from the existing studies indicate there exists a significant variation in the impact of CBA on the properties of various concretes. Nonetheless, numerous studies showed that CBA can be utilized as a sustainable alternative to the conventional natural fine aggregates to produce normal and high-strength concrete. Hence, this study recommends carrying out additional studies in this area to evaluate the effect of the physical and chemical properties of CBA on the resulting properties of 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".