3D Temperature Field Prediction and Experiment Verification of Concrete Diaphragm of Box-Girder Bridge in Early Hardening Period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diaphragm is often used in box-girder bridge for controlling warping stress such those in midspan or transferring strong bearing reactions such those in ends of span. The results of a crack investigation of box-girder bridges showed that vertical cracks can be found on most diaphragms and formed in early stage of the concrete hardening. Temperature caused by hydration heat is an important factor for these cracking. Therefore temperature field prediction for the diaphragm is significant to prevent the concrete diaphragm cracking. In this paper, three-dimensional finite element analysis software ANSYS is used for simulating 3D temperature field of diaphragm of the concrete box girder bridge in all stages of construction. By calculating space temperature field of the diaphragm in different time hydration heat of the law is analyzed, combined with the measured temperature a comparative analysis to verify the validity of the temperature prediction method is conducted. The results show that simulation method is effective and accurate enough to predict the time-varying temperature field of the diaphragm.
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 | 0.001 | 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".