Direct Shear of Self-Consolidating Concrete and Conventional Concrete with Different Coarse Aggregate Size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper exhibits an empirical exploration to compare the impact of the largest size of concrete coarse aggregate (LSCCA) on the direct shear behavior of selfconsolidating concrete (SCC) and traditional vibrated concrete (TVC).The empirical schedule contains eight direct shear specimens (DSSs) having S-shape with an invariable size of 450 mm length×340 mm width×120 mm thickness.The employed LSCCA were 10 mm and 20 mm for SCC and TVC within normal strength (NS) and high strength (HS) stages.The outcomes declare that changing LSCCA from 10 mm to 20 mm has a considerable impact on enhancing the direct shear performance concerning raising the direct shear strength, stiffness, and ductility of SCC and TVC, but the impact on SCC is less significant than that of TVC.Also, the outcomes declare that the changing impact of LSCCA from 10 mm to 20 mm in the HS stage is more considerable than its impact in the NS stage on both SCC and TVC.As for SCC in the NS stage, the ultimate shear stress and highest displacement increase with percentages of 15.2% and 13.9%, and for the HS stage, the increases are with percentages of 9.9% and 8.4% sequentially.For the TVC, the increases in the ultimate shear stress and highest displacement are 21.2% and 16.7% in the NS stage and 13.6% and 14.4% in the HS stage sequentially.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".