Caijun Shi
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Recognitions
Caijun Shi has a total of 146 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Xiang Hu
Key Laboratory for Green & Advanced Civil Engineering Materials and Application Technology of Hunan Province, International Science Innovation Collaboration Base for Green & Advanced Civil Engineering Materials of Hunan Province, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University
10 shared publicationsDehui Wang
State Key Laboratory of Silica Materials for Architectures, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
8 shared publications- Dengwu Jiao
City University of Hong Kong
8 shared publications - Nima Farzadnia
Key Laboratory for Green & Advanced Civil Engineering Materials and Application Technology of Hunan Province, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China
6 shared publications - Zhenguo Shi
Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (Empa), Laboratory for Concrete and Construction Chemistry, Dübendorf, Switzerland
6 shared publications Zhihua Ou
School of Civil Engineering, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou 412007, China
6 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 6 September 2026
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 15 (11) , 3822-3840
Durability of CO 2 mineralized materials and products
1. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) have emerged as a promising pathway toward carbon neutrality in the cement industry and have attracted increasing attention in recent years [1,2]....
- 6 September 2026
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 15 (11) , 3822-3840
Durability of CO 2 mineralized materials and products
1. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) have emerged as a promising pathway toward carbon neutrality in the cement industry and have attracted increasing attention in recent years [1,2]....
- 2 January 2026
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 551-580
Applications
- 18 November 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Cement and Concrete Research
- Vol. 187
Expansion of irregularly shaped aggregate induced by alkali-silica reaction: Insights from numerical modeling
- 18 November 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Cement and Concrete Research
- Vol. 187
Expansion of irregularly shaped aggregate induced by alkali-silica reaction: Insights from numerical modeling
- 11 May 2024
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 13 (6) , 918-937
A review on numerical simulation of the failure of high performance fiber-reinforced concretes
- 11 May 2024
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 13 (6) , 918-937
A review on numerical simulation of the failure of high performance fiber-reinforced concretes
- 3 May 2024
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 13 (7) , 1063-1078
Effect of early CO 2 curing on the chloride induced steel bars corrosion in cement mortars
- 3 May 2024
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials
- Vol. 13 (7) , 1063-1078
Effect of early CO 2 curing on the chloride induced steel bars corrosion in cement mortars
- 6 April 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Hazardous Materials
- Vol. 453, 131363
In-situ conversion of geopolymer into novel floral magnetic sodalite microspheres for efficient removal of Cd(II) from water
- 6 April 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Hazardous Materials
- Vol. 453, 131363
In-situ conversion of geopolymer into novel floral magnetic sodalite microspheres for efficient removal of Cd(II) from water
- 20 October 2022
- Published by Wiley in Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
- Vol. 52 (2) , 285-307
Seismic performance of interior beam‐column joints using reinforced slag‐based geopolymer concrete
Although geopolymer concrete (GC) is recognized as a green and low‐carbon material, GC structural members, particularly beam‐column joints, have been rarely studied. In the present study, eight reinforced GC joints and three reinforced concrete (RC) interior beam‐column joints were tested under cyclic loading. The test parameters were the concrete type, joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio, and axial‐compression ratio. The structural performance, including the failure mode, crack development, cyclic behavior of reinforced GC beam‐column joints, was evaluated. The test results showed that the cyclic behavior and crack development of the reinforced GC beam‐column joints differed from those of RC beam‐column joints. The increase of axial compression ratio improved the seismic performance of reinforced GC beam‐column joints with the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio of 0.96–1.01. When the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio was 1.54–1.61, the increase of axial compression ratio (0.1–0.3) improved the seismic performance, while the axial compression ratio of 0.5 was unfavorable because of significant joint shear damage. The applicability of the control conditions in the current design codes to the reinforced GC joints was evaluated. The control conditions of ACI 318–19 were applicable to the seismic design of reinforced GC beam‐column joints. On the other hand, the control conditions of GB50010‐2010 were not applicable because of the overestimated upper limit value of the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio and axial compression ratio.
- 20 October 2022
- Published by Wiley in Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
- Vol. 52 (2) , 285-307
Seismic performance of interior beam‐column joints using reinforced slag‐based geopolymer concrete
Although geopolymer concrete (GC) is recognized as a green and low‐carbon material, GC structural members, particularly beam‐column joints, have been rarely studied. In the present study, eight reinforced GC joints and three reinforced concrete (RC) interior beam‐column joints were tested under cyclic loading. The test parameters were the concrete type, joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio, and axial‐compression ratio. The structural performance, including the failure mode, crack development, cyclic behavior of reinforced GC beam‐column joints, was evaluated. The test results showed that the cyclic behavior and crack development of the reinforced GC beam‐column joints differed from those of RC beam‐column joints. The increase of axial compression ratio improved the seismic performance of reinforced GC beam‐column joints with the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio of 0.96–1.01. When the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio was 1.54–1.61, the increase of axial compression ratio (0.1–0.3) improved the seismic performance, while the axial compression ratio of 0.5 was unfavorable because of significant joint shear damage. The applicability of the control conditions in the current design codes to the reinforced GC joints was evaluated. The control conditions of ACI 318–19 were applicable to the seismic design of reinforced GC beam‐column joints. On the other hand, the control conditions of GB50010‐2010 were not applicable because of the overestimated upper limit value of the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio and axial compression ratio.