Replacement of Portland Cement Clinker with Limestone and Duraflex Admixture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, an alternative cementitious binder is studied, incorporating a mineral admixture, Duraflex (DFI), and pulverised limestone (PL) to reduce the clinker (CK) content of Portland cement (PC) by 30%. A comprehensive experimental program investigated the flowability and compressive strength of cementitious pastes produced with varying DFI content and water-to-binder (w/b) ratios. Results show that the alternative cementitious binder, comprising 2% by weight of DFI and 26% by weight of PL at a w/b ratio of 0.30, can enhance or maintain the 7- and 28-day compressive strengths relative to the control with 100% PC. Hence, masonry mortars and concrete masonry units (CMUs) were produced with these proportions to be tested for compressive strength. When these proportions incorporated sand and hydrated lime to produce masonry mortar, the proposed alternative binder was found to be insufficient to compensate for the strength reduction caused by replacing high CK levels with DFI and PL. However, the combination of DFI and PL yielded strengths comparable to those of the conventional mixes when used to produce hollow CMUs. The CMU results exhibited high consistency, attributed to the mechanical compaction applied by the block-making machine. This process ensured uniform density and produced a more homogeneous microstructure throughout the specimens. The improvement is linked to the reactivity of DFI, which promotes additional C-S-H gel formation and densifies the microstructure. The findings demonstrate the potential of DFI and PL – locally available – in high replacement levels of CK, mitigating the environmental impact of PC manufacturing. Overall, the study presents an alternative approach to producing cementitious materials and CMUs without compromising strength.
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 | 0.001 | 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".