Variation of Formwork Pressure with Thixotropy of Self-Consolidating Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental investigation was carried out to determine the influence of thixotropy on the development of formwork lateral pressure. Five self-consolidating concrete (SCC) mixtures prepared with different combinations of cementitious materials and set-modifying admixtures were evaluated. An experimental column measuring 2100 mm in height and 200 mm in diameter was used to determine lateral pressure distribution using five pressure sensors mounted at 50, 250, 450, 850, and 1250 mm from the base. This paper offers a comprehensive review of key factors affecting formwork pressure developed by fresh concrete and presents the results pertaining to the influence of thixotropy on variations in lateral pressure of SCC. The results show that the lateral pressure exerted by the plastic SCC is directly related to thixotropy. With the increase in thixotropy, the initial lateral pressure registered following casting decreases, and the rate of drop in lateral pressure is accelerated. This is attributed to the reversible effect of the thixotropy which enables the material to regain its shear strength, internal friction, and cohesion when left at rest without any shearing action. Immediately after casting, any decrease in lateral pressure was attributed to the increased internal friction resulting from the use of ternary cement and greater concentration of coarse aggregate. The use of a set-retarding agent resulted in a delay in cement hydration that led to a slower rate of drop in lateral pressure. Conversely, the incorporation of a set-accelerating agent resulted in an increase in the rate of pressure drop.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".