Recovery of Plastic Waste in the Production of Industrial Sludge-Based Geopolymer Mortars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research study is to produce a geopolymer mortar with a lower environmental impact, to recycle polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic waste, and study the possibility of using PET particles as a substitute for sand by replacing and using calcined industrial sludge as a precursor in mortar production.A study of the geopolymer mortars revealed a chemical and mineralogical composition and mechanically compatible with that of a control geopolymer mortar, defined as a mortar with no plastic added to the geopolymer paste.The industrial sludge precursors revealed the presence of (Quartz and Muscovite) two crystalline phases.The FTIR spectra of the geopolymer slurries showed the presence of Si-O-T, with this absorption band shifting to lower frequencies when PET particles were added to the slurry.We also analyzed SEM images of some samples.The compressive strength and flexural strength of the mortar showed a decrease with an increase in PET particles as an alternative to sand.Geopolymer mortars formulated with recycled plastic as a sand alternative displayed mechanical performance approaching that of sand-based mortars.These findings collectively suggest the viability of utilizing plastic waste as a raw material for geopolymer mortar production.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".