ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Investigation of Strength Characteristics and Microstructure of Cemented Tailings Backfill.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The strength of cemented tailings backfill (CTB) is influenced by multiple factors, with the type of cementitious material playing a crucial role in determining the strength of the backfill. To investigate the influence of two different cementitious materials on the strength of CTB, based on the fundamental physicochemical properties of tailings, flow characteristic tests and uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) tests of the backfill were conducted using a cementitious backfill slurry prepared from tailings. Representative proportioned backfill specimens were selected for X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscope (SEM) microstructural analysis to study the evolution patterns of backfill strength influenced by cementitious material type, cement-to-tailing (c/t) ratio, and slurry concentration. The results indicate that the tailings exhibit favorable gradation but unstable continuity. Furthermore, a high content of clay minerals such as kaolinite, along with the presence of fluorine (F) and phosphorus (P), adversely affects the strength of fillers. In terms of slurry flowability, the fluidity of cementation powder filling slurry is generally superior to that of cemented filling slurry. In identical conditions, the strength of cementation powder fillers at all ages is significantly higher than that of cement. As the c/t ratio decreases, the strength advantage of cementation powder fillers becomes even more prominent. Compared to cemented fillers, the hydrated product calcium silicate hydrate gel (C-S-H gel) in cementation powder fillers is more abundant, while the hydrated product calcium aluminate hydrate (CAH) is coarser. This microscopic structural difference explains the strength characteristics of the fillers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.