Mechanical Properties of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Made with Basalt Filament Fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fiber-reinforced concrete (FRC) has become a viable new material used in various constructions such as building pavements, large industrial floors, and runways. In this research, basalt chopped fibers in filament form were used to develop an FRC material called basalt fiber-reinforced concrete (BFRC) to study the possible improvement in the 28-day compressive strength and modulus of rupture, though the latter one is more important for the construction of pavements, industrial floors, and runways. The basalt fiber specimens were cast using basalt filament fibers of three different lengths and three different amounts. Clumping of fibers at high fiber amounts caused mixing and casting problems. These problems become even more severe when long fibers are used at the high fiber dosage amount. The results indicated that 36-mm-long chopped basalt filament fiber and a fiber amount of 8 kg/m3 are optimum for achieving high performance in both the compressive strength and modulus of rupture. This paper discusses the test matrix and test results obtained from various BFRC and plain concrete specimens.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".