MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965839413 · doi:10.18280/rcma.290206

Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar Test and Numerical Simulation of Steel Fiber-reinforced High-strength Concrete

2019· article· fr· W2965839413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ji Li, Shaoqing Shi, Qiulin He, Shou Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancés · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSplit-Hopkinson pressure barBar (unit)Materials scienceStructural engineeringComposite materialFiber-reinforced concreteFiberSteel barHigh strength steelComputer simulationEngineeringGeologyStrain rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fabrication and optimization of the shelter layer are critical to the performance of the protective works. The novel shelter layer made of steel fiber-reinforced high-strength concrete (SFRHSC) is much more advantageous than that of ordinary concrete. This paper carries out a split-Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) test on the steel fiber and high-strength concrete, two main components of the SFRHSC, aiming to disclose the failure features and dynamic compressive strength of the SFRHSC under dynamic conditions. Specifically, the SFRHSC specimens with 0 %, 0.5 % and 1.0 % of steel fiber were subjected to impact compression test under the air pressures of 0.7, 0.9 and 1.0MPa, respectively. In addition, the impact compression process was also numerically simulated on the finite-element software LS-DYNA. The research results show that: the increase in strain rate pushed up the dynamic compressive strength of the SFRHSC, that is, the failure degree of the specimen was greatly enhanced by the strain rate; under the air pressure of 0.7MPa, the specimen with 1.0 % of steel fiber had the highest dynamic compressive strength (180.9MPa), 22.6 % higher than that of the specimen with no steel fiber; the numerical simulation reproduced the one-dimensional (1D) propagation of the stress wave in the bars, which proves the hypothesis of 1D elastic stress wave, and restaged the impact compression process on the SFRHSC, outputting results similar to the test data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancésSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207