Investigation of High Plasticity Clay Stabilized with Cement and Zeolite Using Time-Dependent Pressure Wave Velocity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enhancing the dynamic properties of expansive soils using cementitious materials has attracted the attention of many researchers over the past few decades. Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) can be used as partial substitutes for cement owing to their pozzolanic activity that further improves the mechanical performance of cement-stabilized soils upon curing. In this study, the effect of cement and zeolite incorporation on the mechanical behavior of expansive clay was quantified using the pressure wave velocity (Vp) indicator obtained from ultrasonic pulse velocity tests performed at different curing times. Furthermore, a polynomial model was developed to establish the relationship between Vp and zeolite replacement levels at specific curing times and cement contents. The results show that a polynomial function captured the decreasing trend of Vp upon the increase in zeolite at curing times below 14 days. Additionally, the developed equation explained the upward trend of Vp owing to the pozzolanic activity of zeolite at later curing times with an accuracy of over 92%. The coefficients of the polynomial model also increased with the increment of the cement percentage which conformed to the consecutive rise in Vp. Ultimately, the polynomial coefficients were expressed in terms of cement content and curing time using the Volterra series. Using this model, the optimum percentage of cement replaced with zeolite (Zopt), the efficiency of using Zopt instead of cement, and the percentage of zeolite replacement to achieve equivalent Vp of cemented clay samples (ZC) were estimated. The findings of this study contribute to promoting geotechnical sustainability by replacing cement with zeolite that has a considerably lower environmental footprint.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".