MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964607418 · doi:10.1139/l05-006

Seismic performance of high-strength concrete square columns confined with carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRPs)

2005· article· en· W1964607418 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. Hosseini, Ali Khaloo, S Fadaee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSharif University of Technology
KeywordsDuctility (Earth science)Fibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialCurvatureMoment (physics)Carbon fiber reinforced polymerReinforcementUltimate loadReinforced concreteEngineeringMathematicsGeometryCreepFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an experimental and analytical study on high-strength, reinforced-concrete (RC) columns with different levels of initial ductility enhanced with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) wraps. Six square columns 260 mm wide and 1650 mm long were tested under constant axial load and reversed cyclic lateral load. The test specimens were divided into three groups. Groups I and II were designed and detailed according to the requirements of American Concrete Institute ACI318-02 for intermediate-moment frames. Group I was wrapped with CFRP, group II was control specimens, and group III was designed and detailed according to the requirements of ACI318-02 for special-moment frames. Each group consisted of two columns with ρ sl = 1.5% and 3.0% longitudinal steel rebars, where ρ sl is the ratio of area of longitudinal reinforcement to gross area of concrete. The moment–curvature is numerically calculated for sections with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) confinement. The theoretical prediction provides conservative results compared with the test data. Based on the test results, CFRP enhanced ultimate displacement and curvature ductility by 53% and 79%, respectively, in column WI4 with four longitudinal bars and 27% and 28%, respectively, in column WI8 with eight longitudinal bars. Moreover, the performance of wrapped columns was enhanced to a level higher than that of unwrapped columns designed according to special-moment frames.Key words: strengthening, ductility, FRP wrap, moment–curvature, high-strength concrete.

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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations26
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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