Laboratory mix preparation and investigation of mechanical behaviour of polyurethane-bound porous rubber pavement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rise in stormwater runoffs, permeable pavement like polyurethane-bound porous rubber pavement (PRP) offers a viable solution for urban stormwater management. Composed of stone and recycled crumb rubber aggregates bound by polyurethane, PRP features high air voids. This study explores PRP’s mechanical behaviour and freeze–thaw durability in cold climates, essential for sustainable urban infrastructure. We developed methods for sample preparation and air void assessment in PRP and conducted tests on compressive and indirect tensile strength, plus moisture-induced damage. Two scenarios were investigated: one examined four new mixes of varied compositions, and the other focused on mixes with different binders (aliphatic and aromatic). Our investigation reveals insights into PRP’s mechanical behaviour under colder climate conditions. The study shows that higher proportions of stone aggregates and binders enhance mechanical strength, while increased rubber content improves freeze–thaw durability. Furthermore, we found that different binders affect strength variations. The study concludes PRP is effective for low-traffic pavements in colder, freeze–thaw regions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".