MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1942945601 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2012-0509

Experimental testing and finite element modeling on continuous concrete beams reinforced with fibre reinforced polymer bars and stirrups

2013· article· en· W1942945601 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mostafa El-Mogy, Amr El-Ragaby, Ehab El-Salakawy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringReinforcementFinite element methodMaterials scienceParametric statisticsTransverse planeReinforced concreteReinforced solidComposite materialEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous concrete beams are common elements in structures such as parking garages and overpasses, which might be exposed to extreme weather. Using the non-corrodible fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) bars is a viable alternative to avoid steel corrosion problems. Due to the linear-elastic behaviour of FRP materials, the possibility of moment redistribution in FRP-reinforced beams is questionable. In this paper, the experimental results of ten full-scale continuous concrete beams are summarized followed by a finite element parametric study using ANSYS software. Steel, glass fibre reinforced polymer, and carbon fibre reinforced polymer bars were used in different combinations as longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. The main investigated parameters were the ratio and type of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. Results showed that moment redistribution in such beams is possible if the reinforcement configuration is chosen properly. The developed finite element model predicted the response of tested beams with a reasonable degree of accuracy and was used to expand the range of investigated parameters.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207