ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Benchmarking Standard and Micromechanical Models for Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete Relevant for Nuclear Power Plants.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shrinkage and Creep Properties of Low-Carbon Hybrid Cement.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The creep and shrinkage of concrete play important roles for many nuclear power plant (NPP) and engineering structures. This paper benchmarks the standard and micromechanical models using a revamped and appended Northwestern University database of laboratory creep and shrinkage data with 4663 data sets. The benchmarking takes into account relevant concretes and conditions for NPPs using 781 plausible data sets and 1417 problematic data sets, which cover together 47% of the experimental data sets in the database. The B3, B4, and EC2 models were compared using the coefficient of variation of error (CoV) adjusted for the same significance for short-term and long-term measurements. The B4 model shows the lowest variations for autogenous shrinkage and basic and total creep, while the EC2 model performs slightly better for drying and total shrinkage. In addition, confidence levels at 5, 10, 90, and 95% are quantified in every decade. Two micromechanical models,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.