Optimization and Characterization of Cementitious Composites Combining Maximum Amounts of Waste Glass Powder and Treated Glass Aggregates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work investigates the combined use of waste glass aggregates (GA) and glass powder (GP) in cementitious mortars. For this reason, the optimized incorporation of GA by natural aggregates (NA) replacements was first studied after applying a surface roughening method with hydrofluoric acid. The compressive strength results were utilized to select the best mixture with GA. Then, different GP contents were added by cements substitutions to the optimized GA-based mortar. A control mortar without GA and GP amounts was also casted as a reference for comparison. The detailed mechanical, physical and durability properties of the resulted mixtures with combined GA and GP were assessed by considering the compressive and flexural strengths, ultra-sonic pulse velocity, alkali-silica reaction (ASR), rapid chloride permeability test (RCPT), magnesium sulphate attack and sulfuric acid resistance. The microstructure of different optimized (GA + GP)-combinations was characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS)in order to analyse the interfacial transition zone (ITZ) between glass materials and the surrounding matrix. The results showed that the optimized composition with 75% GA and 25% GP was shown with high compacity and durability characteristics due to the increased GA/matrix ITZ and the formation of C–(N,K)–S–H products with C–S–H.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it