MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291162963 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.08.013

Substitutive effect of nano-SiO2 for silica fume in ultra-high-performance concrete on fiber pull-out behavior

2022· article· en· W4291162963 on OpenAlexaff
Taekgeun Oh, Booki Chun, Seung Kyun Lee, Wonkyo Lee, Nemkumar Banthia, Doo‐Yeol Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
KeywordsSilica fumeMaterials scienceCompressive strengthPozzolanComposite materialShrinkageNano-Bond strengthPozzolanic activityFiberThermogravimetric analysisPozzolanic reactionCementChemical engineeringPortland cementAdhesive

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the effect of substituting nano-SiO 2 for silica fume on the fiber-matrix interfacial bond performance of ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC). In this study, silica fume was substituted by nano-SiO 2 in the weight range of 0–50%. The degree of pozzolanic reaction of binder materials was evaluated using the thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and compressive strength measurement. The single fiber pull-out test was conducted along with a measurement of autogenous shrinkage to evaluate the interfacial bond. The degree of pozzolanic reaction of nano-SiO 2 was found to be higher than that of other binder materials. Although the packing density was predicted to increase continuously up to a substitution ratio of 50%, the highest compressive strength was obtained when 10% of silica fume was replaced by nano-SiO 2 , which improved the compressive strength by 5.9% compared to that of the plain sample. The autogenous shrinkage increased with an increasing content of nano-SiO 2 up to 30%; however, it remained similar beyond the nano-SiO 2 content of 30%. The best pull-out performance was obtained when 20% of silica fume was replaced by nano-SiO 2 , in which the average bond strength and pull-out energy were improved by approximately 21 and 68%, respectively. Therefore, substitution of 10–20% of silica fume by nano-SiO 2 was recommended as an optimal amount considering the improvements of the compressive strength and fiber-matrix bond performance of UHPC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.302
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207