Use of Recycled Windshield Glass as Sand Replacement in CementBased Mortars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The construction industry is essential for social development in the world and the concrete is one of the most used materials for that purpose.Moreover, the manufacture of the concrete requires large quantities of sand and coarse aggregates, causing the depletion of natural resources.According to the above, the use of discarded or recycled materials as partial substitute of natural aggregates for concrete is attracting the attention of researchers around the world.One of these discarded materials is the windshield glass (WG), a special glass used for automobiles, which is available in large quantities around the world causing disposal issues because the difficulty of being recycled.In this research, the use of WG is proposed for the preparation of cement-based mortars as a first step before to be used in concrete mixtures.A low energy treatment is proposed to remove the WG from the adhesive polyvinyl layer that makes up the windshield.After that, different percentages of sand were replaced by WG for the preparation of the cement-based mortars.The flow of the mortars in fresh state was evaluated.Also, the compressive strength of the hardened mortars was evaluated at 7 and 28 days.The results indicated that the up to 80% WG can be used as partial substitute of sand for structural mortars.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".