MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410842314 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0014

Repurposing waste pozzolans for cleaner mortar production: mechanical and durability properties with microstructural behavior

2025· article· en· W4410842314 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rishath Sabrin, Hasiba Afrin Eema Bachu, Mirza Md Lutful Habib, Nahreeen Mobasharah, A. H. M. Muntasir Billah

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDurabilityRepurposingMortarPozzolanMaterials scienceCleaner productionTileComposite materialWaste managementEngineeringMunicipal solid wasteCementPortland cement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the potential of three waste-derived supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs)—volcanic ash (VA), eggshell (ES), and rice husk ash (RHA)—as partial replacements for ordinary Portland cement (OPC) in mortar. Mortar mixes with 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% replacement levels were evaluated in terms of fresh, mechanical, and durability properties, along with high-temperature performance, failure modes, microstructural characteristics, and cost analysis. The results demonstrated that a 5% replacement of OPC with VA and RHA enhanced compressive strength by 8.2% and 7%, respectively, while ES achieved a 16% increase at a 10% replacement. However, exposure to elevated temperatures led to compressive strength reductions of up to 87%. Flexural strength improvements were observed, with increases of 15% for VA, 43% for ES, and 21% for RHA. Economically, incorporating 20% VA, ES, and RHA led to cost reductions of 1.2%, 7.4%, and 2.5%, respectively. Additionally, the strength-to-CO2 ratio increased up to 11.4%, 22.0%, and 8.3% for VA, ES, and RHA-based mortars, respectively, compared to conventional OPC mortar. All SCMs met ASTM C618-22 criteria for natural pozzolans, with optimal replacement levels determined as 5% for VA, 10% for ES, and 5% for RHA. This study underscores the eco-friendly potential of waste-derived SCMs in producing sustainable mortar while reducing cement consumption, costs, and environmental impact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicConcrete and Cement Materials Research→French-language works237,207→