ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Prediction of Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete Using Different Homogenization Methods.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Concrete is a highly heterogeneous composite material, and accurately predicting its elastic modulus remains a major challenge in mechanical analysis. To address this, this study systematically investigates the predictive performance of several classical homogenization methods for estimating the effective elastic modulus of concrete, including the dilute approximation, self-consistent method, generalized self-consistent method, Mori-Tanaka model, differential method, as well as the Voigt and Reuss models. To enhance prediction accuracy, an improved computational framework is proposed based on an iterative strategy that enables dynamic updating of model parameters. This approach combines principles of mesomechanics with numerical simulation techniques and is implemented using Mathematica for both symbolic and numerical computations. The performance of the models is evaluated under varying aggregate volume fractions and aggregate-matrix stiffness combinations, and validated using multiple experimental datasets from the literature. The results show that the iterative strategy significantly improves the predictive accuracy of several models, reducing the maximum error by up to 30%. Further analysis indicates that the dilute method performs best at low aggregate volume fractions, the Mori-Tanaka model yields the most accurate results when the aggregates are stiff and moderately concentrated, and the generalized self-consistent method outperforms the standard version when the elastic moduli of the aggregate and matrix are similar.
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.