Shear Behavior of Solid and Hollow Cylindrical Concrete Beams Made with Recycled Brick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of treated waste crushed brick on shear behavior regarding reinforced concrete beams (RCBs) has been the primary focus of the presented work.A total of 12 concrete beams of 240 mm in height, 1100mm in length, and 130mm in width were used for that purpose.A total of 3 Normal Concrete Beams (HNCB) and 3 Solid Normal Concrete Beams (SNCB) comprise 6 Normal Concrete Beams (NCB) models.In addition, there are 3 Hollow Recycled Brick Concrete Beams (HRBCB) and 3 Solid Recycled Brick Concrete Beams (SRBCB) among the 6 Recycled Brick Concrete Beams (RBCB) models.The obtained crushed brick from building demolition wastes is incorporated in the concrete mixes at these percentages of 0%, and 50% as a replacement by the weight of coarse aggregate.Samples have been tested for bending at four points.The maximum deflection happened at mid-span of the beam.In the test, diagonal cracking load, as well as ultimate shear strength, were assessed to examine the behavior of the beam concrete with the waste material.The purpose of this experiment has been to ascertain how crushed brick affected the mechanical characteristics of RCBs.Furthermore, the outcomes demonstrate that the addition of crushed brick enhanced the mechanical characteristics of samples and enhanced shear behavior regarding the concrete beams made of crushed brick in comparison to control samples.The findings contribute to the understanding of the mechanical behavior and failure mechanisms of such beams and provide valuable insights into the potential use of recycled brick aggregates in structural applications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".