Corrosion resistance of chromium‐steel and stainless steel reinforcement in concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents results of a study conducted to determine the corrosion‐resistance of chromium‐steel (ASTM A1035 steel) and several stainless steel grades (316LN, 304, 2205, and XM‐28), as concrete reinforcements. The study included laboratory experiments investigating the reinforcements’ performance in a concrete pore solution containing chlorides, with and without wetting and drying cycles, as well as in cases of cracked and uncracked concretes exposed to chlorides. The study also included field‐exposure experiments, where reinforced mortar bars and bare bars were exposed to a marine tidal environment. Results indicated that the service‐life enhancement provided by these reinforcements was highly dependent on their alloy composition. ASTM A1035 steel was found to be less corrosion‐resistant than all stainless steel grades, due to the lower alloy contents. XM‐28 was also found to have a substantially lower corrosion resistance compared to other stainless steels, due to the incorporation of manganese, coupled with the lower nickel content. Finally, 304, 316LN, and 2205 reinforcements showed no signs of corrosion onset in all experiments, even in cases of cracked 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".