Evaluation of SCC yield stress from L-box test using the dam break model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, an analytical method for the dam break flow of non-Newtonian fluids is extended to model self-compacting concrete flow in the L-box test. The rheology of fresh self-compacting concrete is expressed by a Bingham model. To simplify the mathematical formulation, inertia forces and the effect of rebar are neglected and the fluid is assumed to be homogeneous. Several self-compacting concrete mixtures with different yield stresses are also tested to measure the L-box blocking ratio. The proposed model arrested profiles satisfactorily coincide with the experimental results. A relation between yield stress and the L-box blocking ratio is also derived. A comparison between the predicted values of yield stress and the experimental results shows that the proposed model successfully evaluates the yield stress of the tested samples. Moreover, it is observed that the proposed model is valid in the case of an L-box with rebar. Finally, a plot of the relative yield stress against L-box blocking ratio is presented that can be practically used for workability design of self-compacting concrete.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".