Potential of soil-based boards to replace conventional gypsum plasterboards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gypsum plasterboards are a cornerstone of the western construction practices, appreciated as much for its availability and cheap price than for its properties and workability. However, its low reuse after demolition results in a large volume of construction, renovation, and demolition (CRD) waste and the production of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) at landfill sites. In this study, a new type of soil-based board was developed, combining soil and wood fibers, to achieve the same properties as gypsum plasterboards while improving end-of-life performance. These boards showed far greater hydric properties, having a water storage capacity increased by 303–746 % in comparison to gypsum over the regular RH range observable in buildings and 2.84–3.36 times its moisture buffering value. They also displayed improved acoustic properties, with a STC increased by 10 and a slightly improved sound absorption. The mechanical and thermal properties of these new boards were very similar to those of gypsum, although their higher modulus of rupture (MOR) would make them more difficult to work with on-site. The combustibility of the developed boards, as tested with a cone calorimeter, was also higher, with total heat release values ranging from 2.16 to 2.56 times higher. This concern could, however, be damped by the addition of fireproofing clays like perlite and vermiculite. • Plasterboards were prepared by casting soil and wood fibers between lining papers. • The plasterboards showed similar mechanical properties to those of made of gypsum. • Their acoustic insulation was 8–10 dB higher than gypsum plasterboards. • The thermal inertia and moisture absorption of these plasterboards were very high.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".