Mechanical properties of 3D printed concrete: a RILEM TC 304-ADC interlaboratory study — flexural and tensile strength
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper discusses the flexural and tensile strength properties of 3D printed concrete, based on the results of a RILEM TC 304-ADC interlaboratory study on mechanical properties. These properties are determined using different testing techniques, including 3- and 4-point flexural tests, splitting tests, and uniaxial tension tests, on specimens extracted from large 3D printed elements in accordance with a prescribed study plan. The relationship between compressive and flexural or tensile strengths, cast or printed samples, different types of tests, and different loading orientations, are analysed to understand the influence of 3D printing. As expected, the strength can reduce significantly when the main tensile stress is acting perpendicular to the interface between layers. The role of deviations from the standard study procedure, in terms of the time interval between the placing of subsequent layers, or the adoption of a different curing strategy, are also assessed. While the increased time interval significantly impacts the strength in the critical direction, the use of variable curing conditions does not seem to have a clear-cut effect on the strength ratios of the printed to cast specimens. Additionally, the paper looks at the variability in the results for the printed specimens, in order to emphasize the need for multiple replicates for obtaining a proper result. An extensive insight into the aspects affecting the variability is presented in the paper. Finally, with the limited dataset available for specimens tested at a larger scale, it is difficult to arrive at a clear understanding of the role of specimen size (i.e., greater number of layers).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".