Evaluation of self-consolidating concrete shear strength by means of push-off test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-consolidating concrete (SCC) can be characterised by its flowability, stability and passing ability. Although SCC tends to have a more uniform microstructure in the concrete–reinforcement interfacial transition zone, the reduction of the nominal size and coarse aggregate content in the concrete mix may adversely affect its shear strength. Therefore, the aim of this research was to evaluate the shear strength of SCC by means of push-off tests of 45 specimens, produced with one conventional concrete and two SCC mixtures, with two different coarse aggregate contents (reference and reduced by 30%). The transverse reinforcement ratio ranged from 0.46% to 2.28%, using closed stirrups crossing the shear plane. The increase of reinforcement ratio resulted in improvements in shear strength for specimens with one, two and three stirrups, while specimens with four and five stirrups had a premature failure owing to concrete crushing near the notch. No significant difference in shear strength was identified owing to concrete type or coarse aggregate. The experimental results were also compared with codes estimates, and Eurocode 2 presented the best fit to experimental results when compared with the American code ACI 318 and the Canadian standard CSA A23.3.
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 | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".