MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391264907 · doi:10.1016/j.dibe.2024.100343

Strain-hardening effect on the flexural behavior of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete beams with steel rebars

2024· article· en· W4391264907 on OpenAlexaff
Doo‐Yeol Yoo, Salman Soleimani-Dashtaki, Taekgeun Oh, Booki Chun, Nemkumar Banthia, Seung-Jung Lee, Young-Soo Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopments in the Built Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative concrete reinforcement materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
KeywordsMaterials scienceFlexural strengthVolume fractionComposite materialFiber-reinforced concreteUltimate tensile strengthDuctility (Earth science)Strain hardening exponentCrackingSofteningFiberHardening (computing)Structural engineeringCreepLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the effects of volume fraction, aspect ratio, and shape of steel fibers on the mechanical properties of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) and the structural behavior of reinforced (R-) UHPFRC beams. The tensile strength and energy absorption capacity of ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) are improved by adding steel fibers and increasing its volume contents by up to 3.0 %. Compared with short straight steel fiber, medium-length straight and twisted fibers at a volume fraction of 2.0 % result in twice higher energy absorption capacity and higher flexural strength of R–UHPFRC beams. The flexural strength of R–UHPC beams increases by increasing the fiber content up to 3.0 %. However, the strain-hardening characteristics of UHPFRC negatively influence the cracking behavior and stress redistribution in structural beams, causing 48.2–54.1 % lower ultimate ductility indices. The small amounts of steel fibers with volume fraction of ≤1.0 % that exhibit strain-softening behavior only improve the peak ductility.

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)0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopments in the Built EnvironmentSame topicInnovative concrete reinforcement materialsFrench-language works237,207