Shear Behavior of High-Strength and Lightweight Cementitious Composites Containing Hollow Glass Microspheres and Carbon Nanotubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, an experimental program was conducted to investigate the shear behavior of beams made of high-strength and lightweight cementitious composites (HS-LWCCs) containing hollow glass microspheres and carbon nanotubes. The compressive strength and dry density of the HS-LWCCs were 87.8 MPa and1.52 t/m3, respectively. To investigate their shear behavior, HS-LWCC beams with longitudinal rebars were fabricated. In this test program, the longitudinal and shear reinforcement ratios were considered as the test variables. The HS-LWCC beams were compared with ordinary high-strength concrete (HSC) beams with a compressive strength of 89.3 MPa to determine their differences; the beams had the same reinforcement configuration. The test results indicated that the initial stiffness and shear capacity of the HS-LWCC beams were lower than those of the HSC beams. These results suggested that the low shear resistance of the HS-LWCC beams led to brittle failure. This was attributed to the beams’ low elastic modulus under compression and the absence of a coarse aggregate. Furthermore, the difference in the shear capacity of the HSC and HS-LWCC beams slightly decreased as the shear reinforcement ratio increased. The diagonal compression strut angle and diagonal crack angle of the HS-LWCC beams with shear reinforcement were more inclined than those of the HSC beams. This indicated that the lower shear resistance of the HS-LWCCs could be more effectively compensated for when shear reinforcement is provided and the diagonal crack angle is more inclined. The ultimate shear capacities measured in the tests were compared with various shear design provisions, including those of ACI-318, EC2, and CSA A23.3. This comparison showed that the current shear design provisions considerably overestimate the contribution of concrete to the shear capacity of HS-LWCC beams.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".