Strength and suction development of cemented paste backfill with ternary cement blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the effect of ternary binder containing Portland cement type I (PCI), slag, and limestone (LS) powder in varying proportions on the suction development and the mechanical strength of cemented paste backfill (CPB) was investigated. Mechanical tests, microstructural analyses (thermo-gravimetry analysis (TG/DTG) and mercury intrusion porosimetry), and monitoring (suction, electrical conductivity, and temperature) experiments were conducted on CPB. In the first part of this study, binary binders with two different PCI:slag proportions, 50:50 and 80:20, were examined with no LS, followed by the slag replacement with increasing weight percentages of LS from 0% to 20% by weight of the total binder, with constant cement content. The results indicate that the slow slag hydration kinetics decreased the suction and strength gain rate at a young age in the binary sample with high slag content (50 wt.%); however, its latent hydraulic and pozzolanic properties enhanced the strength gain at a later age, from 28 days. The addition of 5 wt.% and 10 wt.% LS to the ternary binder system improved the early age strength of CPB up to 7 days and 1 day, respectively, compared with the binary control samples, i.e., CPB with slag and without LS. While the addition of up to 10% LS to the ternary binder improved the rate of suction development and increased suction at early ages, beyond 10%, the addition of LS slightly decreased mechanical performance at all ages. Overall, the results obtained reveal that up to 50 wt.% slag with up to 10 wt.% LS with cement could be used as a ternary binder to improve the early age strength and suction development rate of CPB studied without significant loss in compressive strength at advanced ages. The results of this research could be of great benefit to the mining industry through the use of a ternary binder to replace cement, which could improve the overall performance of the CPB system, facilitate a more sustainable CPB design, and improve tailings management practices and overall economics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".