MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307044468 · doi:10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01604

Damage evolution models of static pre-loaded concrete under impact load based on the Weibull distribution

2022· article· en· W4307044468 on OpenAlexaff
Qiangqiang Zheng, Hao Hu, Ying Xu, Tong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Studies in Construction Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeibull distributionDissipationSplit-Hopkinson pressure barDynamic load testingStructural engineeringMaterials scienceDynamic loadingGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyEngineeringStrain rateMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Affected by static loads, ahead of the dynamic loads such as blasting, flowage, and earthquakes, concrete structures are already in various degrees of damage. Against this engineering backdrop, the damage degree should be considered in seismic design and disaster mitigation for concrete structures. To investigate the dynamic mechanical properties, energy evolution, and fracture mechanism of damaged concrete under dynamic load. The damage models of the dynamic compressive strength, energy dissipation density, and fragmentation characteristics related to the damage degree based on the Weibull distribution are theoretically studied and demonstrated by experiment. Uniaxial loading with diverse pre-loads is employed to make the concrete in varying damage degrees. The Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) is employed to investigate the damaged concrete's dynamic mechanical properties, energy evolution, and fracture characteristics. The experiment demonstrates the rationality of the theoretical study, the growth ratio of energy dissipation density, reduction rates of dynamic strength, and the average diameter of the fractured concrete all follow the Weibull distribution. The energy dissipation density and fragmentation degree of the damaged concrete under impact load increase with pre-load rise, while the dynamic strength and transmission energy are opposites.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Studies in Construction MaterialsSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207