Acoustic Emission Analysis of the Cracking Behavior in ECC-LWSCC Composites
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acoustic emission (AE) analysis was utilized to assess the cracking behavior of six lightweight self-consolidating concrete (LWSCC)–engineering cementitious composite (ECC) beams under flexural loading. Two control beams were fully cast with ECC containing either polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fibers or steel fibers (SF). The remaining four beams were ECC-LWSCC composite beams, with the ECC layer containing PVA fibers or SF placed on either the tension or compression side. The results showed that the control beams had the highest ultimate load capacity, followed by beams repaired in tension, and then beams repaired in compression. PVA fibers exhibited higher performance compared to steel fibers at the first crack load, while steel fibers enhanced the beam’s performance at the ultimate load stage. During the flexural testing, AE parameters such as the number of hits, signal amplitude, and cumulative signal strength (CSS) were collected until failure. The analysis of these AE parameters was effective in detecting the first crack and evaluating cracking propagation in all beams. Changing the type of fibers (PVA and SF) in the ECC layer showed a significant effect on AE parameters. Moreover, adding a new ECC layer to an existing LWSCC layer resulted in variations in the signal amplitude. Finally, the flexural failure mode was confirmed with the aid of the rise time/maximum amplitude vs. average frequency analysis.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it