Protection of reinforced concrete beams retrofitted by carbon fibre-reinforced polymer composites against elevated temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the outcome of the first part of a 3 year project aiming to investigate the effect of elevated temperatures on carbon fibre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) retrofitted structures. Accordingly, different protecting mixes to be used as thermal insulating covers were proposed and evaluated. This experimental program addresses a series of indirect fire tests on reinforced concrete beams retrofitted with CFRP laminates exposed to a temperature of 900 °C (1652 °F) after being protected with ten types of special mortar covers. Materials known for their low coefficient of thermal conductivity were added in certain ratios to form mortars for these protective covers. Tests were carried out in a test furnace designed to produce the standard temperature–time curve specified in ASTM E119–95a. Scale effect was considered by proper adjustment of the exposure time to fire test. Temperature at the CFRP level, just below the protecting covers, was monitored to determine the efficiency of the covers in reducing heat transfer during the fire test. Furthermore, mechanical bending load tests were performed on specimens before and after fire tests to determine reduction in flexure failure load of the specimens due to indirect fire exposure. This reduction was found to vary from 10% to 48% for different tested coatings. In spite of the high damage in the protection covers expressing the lowest performance, reinforced concrete beams were still unaffected and could be restrengthened to return to their original status. Recommendations showing proper thicknesses of application and necessary precautions to be taken when using CFRP in retrofitting reinforced concrete structures to enhance their fire resistance were presented.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".