Retarding Effect of Hemp Hurd Lixiviates on the Hydration of Hydraulic and CSA Cements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wood wool panels are widely used in the construction industry as sustainable cementitious composites, but there is a growing need to replace traditional Portland cement with a binder that has a lower embodied carbon footprint. In addition, the sustainability of these panels may face serious impediments if the required amount of wood for their production needs a harvest rate higher than the rate at which the tree sources reach maturity. One solution is to use the wooden part of fast-growing plants such as hemp. However, the compounds extracted from the mixture of plants and water are the main cause of the delay observed during the hydration process of hydraulic binders in these cementitious composites. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of bio-aggregate lixiviates (hemp hurd) on the hydration kinetics of calcium sulfoaluminate (CSA) cement as a low-embodied-carbon alternative to ordinary Portland cement (OPC). The isothermal calorimeter showed that the hemp hurd lixiviate caused a greater delay in GU's hydration process than CSA's. At a 5% concentration, the main hydration peak for GU cement emerged after 91 h, whereas for CSA cement, it appeared much earlier, at 2.5 h. XRD and TGA analysis showed that after 12 h of hydration, hydration products such as calcium silicate hydrates (C-S-H) and portlandite (CH) were not able to form on GU cement, indicating low hydration of silicate products. Moreover, at 5% concentration, the carbonation of ettringite was observed in CSA cement. The compressive strength values obtained from the mixes containing hemp hurd lixiviate consistently showed lower values compared to the reference samples prepared with distilled water. Furthermore, the CSA samples demonstrated superior compressive strength when compared to the GU samples. After 28 days of hydration, the compressive strength values for CSA cement were 36.7%, 63.5% and 71% higher than GU cement at a concentration of 0.5%, 2% and 5% hemp hurd lixiviate, respectively.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".