Assessment of the flowability and compressive strength of cemented paste backfills composed of muscovite-rich tailings: impact of admixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increased prevalence of phyllosilicates such as muscovite in mine tailings and their adverse effects on the compressive strength of cemented paste backfills (CPBs) have recently attracted significant attention. This issue presents challenges for underground backfilling operations, underscoring the necessity for a comprehensive understanding and effective solutions. Admixtures can mitigate the increased water demand and loss of uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) by influencing the binder hydration process and the microstructure of the CPB, which are critical for determining the type and quantity of hydrates formed. This study examines the compatibility of selected admixtures in CPB containing different proportions of muscovite (0, 3, 8 and 18%) and evaluates their effectiveness in enhancing fluidity and compressive strength. The experimental program aims to reveal significant alterations in the mechanical properties of CPB with admixture (A1) at varying dosages (up to 3% by weight of cement). The investigation utilises one type of binder – general use Portland limestone cement (Type GUL) at a fixed binder rate (Bw) of 7%. The findings provide valuable insights into the application of admixtures to counteract the adverse effects of muscovite (phyllosilicate) on: 1) the water demand by decrease it to zero-water demand for low to medium muscovite-rich CPBs and up to 55.4% for high muscovite-rich CPB, 2) compressive strength by helping to gain up to 136% of UCS and, 3) the yield stress by decreasing it up to 58.5% .This article presents the potential of admixture to optimise complex and phyllosilicate-rich CPB mix formulations.
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) | 0.001 | 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".