JOINT SEALS FOR HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES IN SEVERE CLIMATES
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents laboratory test data on 21 joint seals: 10 field-moulded sealants (FMS; 1- and 2-components polyurethanes, polysulphides, silicones, etc.) and 11 preformed seals (neoprene, silicone, high-density open-cell and low-density closed-cell foams, etc.). The aim was to evaluate their performance in submerged, partially submerged and essentially dry conditions in extremely severe climates. These seals were tested on cement mortar substrates as well as on steel substrates. The tests carried out on FMS were: adhesion-in-peel strength, compression-extension cycling at severe temperatures, Shore A hardness, weatherability and modulus of elasticity, etc. On preformed seals, the tests conducted were weatherability, % recovery and load deformation behaviour, etc. Conclusions, recommendations and the specific suitability of joint seals with cement mortar and steel substrates are reported. The general conclusion is that even though the joint seals evaluated had similar base chemical constituents, they showed variable results. Their properties and characteristics differ from one manufacturer to others, indicating that prior knowledge about their performance is essential to the user. Furthermore, the published data on the performance of seals used in hydraulic structures situated in severe climatic conditions is sparse. It is recommended that utilities publish as much information as possible to help others.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it