MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090826289 · doi:10.1680/stbu.2009.162.1.69

Impact resistance of fibre-reinforced concrete

2009· article· en· W2090826289 on OpenAlexaff
S. Mindess, L. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and Buildings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCompressive strengthToughnessComposite materialDrop (telecommunication)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fibre reinforcement increases the toughness of plain concrete under static compressive loading. The compressive toughness of fibre-reinforced concrete (FRC) under impact loading has not, however, previously been investigated. The current paper reviews the behaviour of high-strength fibre-reinforced concrete under uniaxial compressive impact loading. An instrumented drop weight impact machine was used to carry out compressive impact tests on various FRC systems with compressive strengths ranging from about 60 MPa to 120 MPa. The deformations of the FRC cylinders were determined using a high-speed video camera system. As expected, the compressive strength was found to increase with increasing drop height (or impact velocity). The dynamic compressive toughness was also found to increase with increasing drop height and with increasing matrix strength. It was observed that the mode of failure of the FRC was dependent upon the properties of the matrix and of the fibres, as well as on the drop height. Thus, the dynamic compressive toughness of FRC appeared to be dependent on the constitutive behaviour of the matrix, the fibre type and volume, the impact velocity and the mode of failure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and BuildingsSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207