Studies on the Influence of Drying Shrinkage Test Procedure, Specimen Geometry, and Boundary Conditions on Free Shrinkage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although considerable progress has been made in enhancing the use and interpretation of free ring shrinkage test, little is known about the impact of the test procedure, the specimen geometry, the surface area-to-volume (S/V) ratio exposed to drying, and the boundary conditions (sealing configuration) on the measured shrinkage. This paper highlights recent findings illustrating the influence of the test procedure, the S/V ratio exposed to drying, the geometry of specimen, and the boundary conditions. A series of experimental results are presented from free shrinkage on ring test specimens to illustrate that the test procedure can significantly influence the measured free shrinkage. A second series of experimental results are presented from specimens with different geometries and S/V ratio exposed to drying to illustrate that drying shrinkage is dependent on both the specimen geometry and the surface exposed to drying. Test results further show that, even for the same S/V ratio exposed to drying, shrinkage is strongly dependent on the specimen’s geometry and boundary conditions.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".