MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982544725 · doi:10.1139/l07-046

Stress along tensile lap-spliced fibre reinforced polymer reinforcing bars in concrete

2007· article· en· W1982544725 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Ragi Aly

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceUltimate tensile strengthStructural engineeringComposite materialModulusBar (unit)Stress (linguistics)Displacement (psychology)Flexural strengthBeam (structure)EngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical study was carried out to investigate stress along tensile lap-spliced spaced or bundled fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) bars in concrete. R. Tepfers developed a mathematical model, which could be applied for any type of reinforcing bar, based on the modulus of displacement theory. The mathematical model can predict the bond stress and stresses in the reinforcing bars and the surrounding concrete. In this paper, the model developed by Tepfers was represented by applying the modulus of displacement theory, and theoretical predictions are compared with the experimental results from testing 16 large-scale concrete beams. Good agreement between the theoretical values and experimental results was observed at three stages of loading. Recommendations for investigating the modulus of displacement from pullout tests have been included. Lastly, the maximum average bond stress of spliced FRP bars can be estimated using the ultimate failure pattern analysis, in which the contributions of the splitting resistance were included.Key words: beams, fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) bars, bundled bars, concrete, tensile lap-splice, pullout tests, modulus of displacement, flexural tests.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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