Hydro-mechanical-damage model for the secondary creep of fiber reinforced mortar at high stress-to-strength ratio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent works have showed that the secondary creep of concrete under sustained high load level of load-to-strength ratio is likely due to a strong coupling between damage and drying shrinkage, which locally occurs in the fracture process zone. The scope of this work is to develop a simplified damage-poromechanical model for the secondary creep of concrete, which directly accounts for such coupling. It was simply assumed that microcracking affects the distribution of the moisture content by scaling the adsorption isotherm with damage. The proposed hydro-mechanical-damage model couplings has been implemented into a discrete lattice method based on dually coupled conduit elements and mechanical element. Notably, the drying shrinkage is accounted within the poromechanical framework of the partially saturated media. The hydro-mechanical-damage model can engender microcrack process zone which govers the secondary creep of concrete at high stress. The model has been validated on 2D experiments of secondary creep on FRC which considers the effect of water-to-cement ratio and aggregate inclusion Finally, the model is validated against experimental results on secondary creep fiber reinforced mortar (FRM) beam considering the effect of concrete heterogeneity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".