Evolution characteristics and mechanism of concrete performance under water pressure environment: A comprehensive review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Compared with the ground service environment, the evolution of concrete performance under a water pressure service environment is quite complex with variable conditions. Because of the coupling effect of load and pressure, water has a special impact on the strength and deformation of concrete. Meanwhile, harmful ions usually react with the cement matrix as pressure water seepages into concrete, resulting in the reduction of concrete durability. Based on this, this study provides a comprehensive review of the strength, deformation, and durability of concrete under water pressure environment. It is found that microcracks in concrete tend to propagate and connect after exposure to water pressure, leading to a decrease in strength and deformation performance. The average loss rate of strength and elastic modulus increased by 12.15% and 10.97%, respectively, when water pressure increased by 1 MPa. However, the loading process of water‐confining pressure makes concrete more compact, where the static and dynamic mechanical performance can be improved. Besides, due to the enhancement of excess pore water pressure, concrete strength under a high strain rate increases by 61.79% compared to static load. The effect of water pressure increases the ability of the liquid to penetrate concrete, and corrosive ions trapped within the liquid and freeze–thaw caused by external temperature changes would further reduce the concrete durability. This study points out that static and dynamic loading characteristics and durability of concrete under multi‐factor coupling in a water pressure environment will be the future research direction. The summarized contents can provide guidance for construction and research of concrete engineering under a water pressure environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".