The effect of basalt glass microspheres and microfibers on the wear resistance of metakaolin‐based geopolymer composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the effect of various microfillers on the abrasion resistance of metakaolin‐based, geopolymer composites. Comparative tests were conducted on a baseline geopolymer and composites reinforced with chamotte powder, basalt microfiber, prestressed, solid, basalt glass microspheres (PSBGM), and their combinations. Abrasion resistance was evaluated according to ASTM C501‐21 using the Taber Abraser. The results demonstrate that prestressed, solid, basalt glass microspheres significantly enhance wear resistance, both individually and in combination with chamotte powder or basalt microfiber. Quantitative analysis indicates that basalt‐based microfillers enhance abrasion resistance by a factor of 3 to 4. This is due to the high surface microhardness of prestressed, solid, basalt glass microspheres, produced using the superheated melt method, which is approximately 7.1 GPa on the Vickers scale. These results confirm the potential of basalt microfillers and geopolymer matrices for developing highly wear‐resistant, fully inorganic, composite materials, coatings, and repair mixtures.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".