Development of glass fiber reinforced plastic poles for transmission and distribution lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An extensive research project is currently being carried out at The University of Manitoba, Canada, to develop lightweight glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) poles for use in transmission and distribution networks. In this paper, results from tests involving full-scale tapered GFRP poles with a hollow circular cross section subjected to cantilever bending are presented. The filament winding process was employed to produce the poles using polyester resin reinforced with E-glass fibers. Cantilever bending tests were conducted on twelve full-scale poles up to failure. Test parameters included fiber orientation and number of layers. Extensive theoretical work preceded the test program and a theoretical model was developed for evaluating the failure load. The results to date indicate that the developed theoretical model can predict quite well the ultimate capacity and behavior performance of GFRP poles. This theoretical model was used in this investigation to determine the optimum cross-sectional dimensions for 6.1 m (20 ft) and 18.3 m (60 ft) Class 1 GFRP poles.Key words: transmission and distribution poles, filament winding, fiber-reinforced plastics.
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 | 0.001 | 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".