Numerical Analysis of Concrete Hydration Heat Impact on Frozen Soil Temperature around Cast-in-Place Piles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydration heat generated during the concreting of cast-in-place piles causes thermal disturbance to the surrounding permafrost, leading to its thawing. This further affects the stability of the pile foundation and degrades the construction progress. To explore the influence mechanisms of the concrete hydration heat on the permafrost temperature field around the pile, as well as that of different construction seasons on the pile-side boundary conditions and permafrost temperature field, monitoring results of on-site tests and numerical simulation were used to analyze the distribution law of the pile soil temperature field in space and time, and the pile-side boundary conditions and permafrost temperature field during construction seasons. The results show that the temperature trend of the pile foundation can be divided into three stages: a rapid rise phase (0∼2 d), a rapid decline phase (2∼10 d), and a slow decline and stabilization phase (10∼90 d). As the radial distance from the pile center decreases, there occur a corresponding acceleration in temperature increase and an elevated maximum temperature rise (MTR). The influence range of the molding temperature and the hydration heat is about 1∼2 times the pile diameter and less than 1.5 m in the depth direction. Compared to the atmospheric temperature, there is a lag in the change in the permafrost temperature caused by accumulation of ground temperature, and the significant difference between the two leads to an increased rate of heat exchange at the boundary condition. Conducting drilling operation and cast-in-place pile construction in the cold seasons is conducive to reducing the thermal disturbance to the permafrost around the pile in permafrost areas.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".