Bridge Deck and Guardrail Anchorage Detailing for Sustainable Construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the use of glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) bar bents as stirrups at the joint between the steel posts of a bridge guardrail system with a deck slab cantilever. In addition, GFRP bars with headed ends are used for better anchorage at the postdeck slab joint. Four full-scale cantilever post specimens were erected and tested to collapse. Two specimens were reinforced with steel bars as control specimens, whereas the other two specimens were reinforced with GFRP straight bars, bent bars, and headed bars at applicable locations. Similar failure modes were observed in all specimens because of curb external side face breakout. Failure occurred in unconfined concrete cover because of significant compressive and frictional shear stresses and also torsional effects, resulting in concrete spalling at the side face of the cantilever at the bottom of the posts. Although it is recommended to consider larger edge distance of the post to prevent premature failure in the unconfined concrete cover, the obtained experimental capacity of the postcurb region was concluded to be sufficient to resist design loads. To calculate the share of the design lateral loads received by each post, a linear finite-element analysis (FEA) and a simplified FEA were used. The analysis showed that the share of each post decreases with decrease in spacing between posts.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".