MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414063153 · doi:10.3390/buildings15173234

Novel Methodological Approach to Developing Scaled-Down Concrete Material for Structural Applications: Experimental Validation Using Froude Scaling

2025· article· en· W4414063153 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdelmoneim El Naggar, Ahmed Soliman, Maged A. Youssef, Hany El Naggar

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityConcordia UniversityWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFroude numberNonlinear systemRepresentation (politics)CentrifugeScalingSimilitudeStructural materialVariance (accounting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Full-scale structural experiments significantly contribute to understanding reinforced concrete (RC) behavior but are often constrained by high costs, extensive time requirements, and practical spatial limitations. Alternatively, small-scale physical models offer a feasible solution, though accurately replicating nonlinear material behavior under load at reduced scales remains challenging. This research addresses these challenges by introducing a methodological approach to developing a novel scaled-down concrete material to emulate full-scale structural behavior. The developed material strictly adheres to Froude similitude criteria, ensuring an accurate representation of gravitational effects without requiring artificially induced gravity, such as centrifuge testing. Experimental validation demonstrates that this material model successfully replicates critical mechanical properties of full-scale concrete, with less than 2% variance observed in compressive strength, strain characteristics, and failure modes. Further validation through comparative testing of scaled-down and corresponding full-scale RC beams confirms the material’s capability to precisely capture structural responses. Consequently, the proposed scaled-down concrete model offers a reliable, economical, and effective approach to evaluating structural performance, overcoming traditional limitations associated with full-scale structural experimentation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207