Implementation of a Non-Metallic Reinforced Bridge Deck, Volume 2 - Thayer Road Bridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary maintenance problem with bridges in Indiana has been deterioration of the concrete deck which is often related to corrosion of the reinforcing steel. While a corrosion protection system consisting of epoxy-coated reinforcement in combination with 2-1/2 in. of Class C concrete cover has been used in Indiana, research and experience have demonstrated that this system can be compromised. As an alternative solution to the corrosion problem in reinforced concrete, fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) bars which are corrosion resistant can be provided as reinforcement. This research was divided into two phases directed towards the implementation of a nonmetallic reinforced bridge deck. The first phase evaluated the bond strength of fiber reinforced polymer reinforcement with the goal of developing a design expression for the calculation of development and splice lengths. Forty-six glass FRP, carbon FRP, and steel reinforced concrete beams with unconfined tension lap splices were tested. The second phase consisted of the design, construction, and performance evaluation of a glass FRP bar reinforced concrete bridge deck. Based on this study, design recommendations are provided for the calculation of development and splice lengths of both FRP and steel reinforcement. Furthermore, the behavior of the FRP reinforced bridge deck is assessed and compared with its design assumptions. The findings of this study provide design tools and behavioral data that will assist in the future development and deployment of this technology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".