Investigation of Various GFRP Shear Connectors for Insulated Precast Concrete Sandwich Wall Panels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) shear connectors provide much reduced thermal bridging in insulated concrete sandwich panels compared to steel connectors. In this study, 50 specimens with dimensions of 254×254×900 mm representing segments of a precast sandwich wall comprising two concrete wythes and a concrete stud surrounded by insulation foam have been tested in a double-shear configuration. Three types of GFRP connectors produced from available sand-coated and threaded rods were tested and compared to conventional steel and polymer connectors. GFRP connector diameters varied from 6 to 13 mm, and spacing varied from 80 to 300 mm. Both circular and rectangular cross sections were examined, along with various end treatments to compare with simple straight embedment. The shear strength of GFRP connectors, including the effect of friction between concrete and foam, ranged from 60 to 112 MPa, significantly higher than polymer connectors but lower than steel connectors. As the connectors bridged a small gab of insulation between concrete wythe and stud, their shear strength was lower than manufacturer-reported values. Varying the size, spacing, cross-section shape, or end treatment of connectors had insignificant effect on their strength. The connectors failed by longitudinal delamination then transverse shear but did not pull out of the concrete wythe. Adhesion bond between concrete and insulation was quite significant and contributed about 28%, but was quite random and variable. A model was developed to predict the strength of connectors and clearly demonstrated the reduction in strength as thickness of insulation layer increases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".