MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378421092 · doi:10.14359/51738818

Linking Concrete Rheology to Strength: Sustainability Model Approach

2023· article· en· W4378421092 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fayez Moutassem, S.E. Chidiac

Bibliographic record

VenueACI Materials Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFederal Highway AdministrationMcMaster UniversityCement Association of CanadaUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsRheologySustainabilityMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A requirement for achieving sustainable concrete structures is to develop a quantitative method for designing concrete mixtures that yields the target rheological properties and compressive strength.Toward this objective, this paper proposes a mathematical model approach to improve the sustainability of the concrete industry.A postulation that packing density, a function of the concrete mixture, provides the link between concrete mixture, rheological properties, and compressive strength was investigated.Rheological models for yield stress and plastic viscosity, and a compressive strength model were adopted with packing density as a central variable.The rheological models employ a cell description that is representative of fresh concrete.The compressive strength model is based on excess paste theory to account for the concrete mixture proportions, gradation of aggregate particles, and porosity.An experimental program was developed to calibrate and test these models.Results revealed that packing density provides a consistent and reliable link, and that the concrete mixture composition can be designed to achieve the target rheological properties and hardened properties and ensure quality control.Consequently, a new mixture proportioning methodology was developed and proposed as an improvement to the ACI 211.1 mixture design method.Furthermore, a case study was conducted to test for the applicability and adequacy of this proposed method.This research outcome, which provides a quantitative approach to design concrete mixtures to meet specific strength requirements and rheology, can also be used to ensure quality control before concrete is cast.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACI Materials JournalSame topicInnovations in Concrete and Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207