MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312791745 · doi:10.24191/jscet.v1i1.42-49

Potential of Coal Bottom Ash as Fine Aggregates in The Production of Lightweight Brick

2022· article· en· W4312791745 on OpenAlexaff
Mohd Fadzil Arshad, Warid Wazien Ahmad Zailani, Anuar Abdul Wahab, Salmia Beddu Fauziah Aziz, Sofian Abdullah, Adeyemi Adesina, Reni Suryanita

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Civil Engineering and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycling and utilization of industrial and municipal waste in materials production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversiti Teknologi MARA
KeywordsBottom ashCompressive strengthBrickPozzolanCoalAbsorption of waterFly ashBuilding materialWaste managementPortland cementEnvironmental scienceCementEfflorescenceMaterials scienceMetallurgyEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of coal bottom ash, a by-product from the coal burning process in lightweight bricks production is getting more attention worldwide including in Malaysia. The main objective of this research is to assess the extended potential of bottom ash to produce lightweight bricks. The green technology-based lightweight bricks in this study are designed using the by-product resulting from the burning of pulverized coal in thermal power plants for electric power generations. The burning of pulverized coal was questioned extensively over the last decades due to the carbon dioxide emission which is about 2.0 billion tons annually. These lightweight bricks are produced from the combination of specifically graded bottom ash, classified pozzolanic ashes, fine aggregates, Ordinary Portland Cement, and water. The lightweight bricks were subjected to a few laboratory assessments including compressive strength test, density test, and water absorption test. It was observed that the C2 brick and C3 brick at 60% and 100% addition of bottom ash, respectively had comparable compressive strength with other commercialized bricks (cement-sand brick and clay brick). The addition of coal bottom ash also produces the lowest density of the bricks which is about 1.2 kg/m3. Comparison with other commercialized bricks available in the market in terms of compressive strength, density, and water absorption indicated that the bottom ash-based bricks are stronger and lighter. A comprehensive selection of good quality materials and the selected mix design produced an acceptable quality of bricks that can be considered as part of the actual construction materials. Thus, with the production of this light and strong brick, the volume of the coal ash waste that was dumped in the landfill will be substantially reduced and simultaneously the lighter bricks will reduce the dead loads supported by the main structures of the building.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Civil Engineering and TechnologySame topicRecycling and utilization of industrial and municipal waste in materials productionFrench-language works237,207