Drop-Weight Impact Response of Fibre Reinforced Cement Based Foams
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 describes the strength and toughness of fibre reinforced cement based foams subjected to bending under variable strain rates. Drop-weight impact tests were conducted on notched beams with cast density between 475 kg/m 3 to 1200 kg/m 3 . The foams were reinforced with 0–0.2% polypropylene microfibre by volume and their role in improving the dynamic properties is illustrated. The structure of the cell wall within the foams was engineered through a suitable choice of foaming agent, such that foams with a predominantly closed cell structure were produced. Companion tests were conducted as per ASTM standards in compression and flexure under quasi-static loading. The results were compared to other brittle cellular solids from the literature, and the mechanical properties are described in terms of the relative density, defined as the ratio of the density of the cellular composite relative to that of Portland cement paste in the cell wall. The study shows that under quasi-static loading, the compressive strength, elastic modulus and modulus of rupture of plain mixes scale with the square of the relative density. On the other hand, the flexural toughness factor scaled linearly with it. Fibres were seen to increase the flexural strength at all rates of loading, regardless of cast density. However, the Poisson's ratio remained unaffected by the density of the mix. Further, cement based foams were seen to be strain rate sensitive but, the existing CEB-FIP model for cementitious materials vastly overestimates the dynamic impact factor at lower cast densities.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it