Transverse Thermal Expansion of FRP Bars Embedded in Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) have a thermal expansion in the transverse direction much higher than in the longitudinal direction and also higher than the thermal expansion of hardened concrete. The difference between the transverse coefficient of thermal expansion of FRP bars and concrete may cause splitting cracks within the concrete under temperature increase and, ultimately, failure of the concrete cover if the confining action of concrete is insufficient. This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation to analyze the effect of the ratio of concrete cover thickness to FRP bar diameter (c∕db) on the strain distributions in concrete and FRP bars, using concrete cylindrical specimens reinforced with a glass FRP bar and subjected to thermal loading from −30to+80°C . The experimental results show that the transverse coefficient of thermal expansion of the glass FRP bars tested in this study is found to be equal to 33 (×10−6mm∕mm∕°C) , on average and the ratio between the transverse and longitudinal coefficients of thermal expansion of these FRP bars is equal to 4. Also, the cracks induced by high temperature start to develop on the surface of concrete cylinders at a temperature varying between +50 and +60°C for specimens having a ratio of concrete cover thickness to bar diameter c∕db less than or equal to 1.5. A ratio of concrete cover thickness to glass fiber reinforced polymers (GFRP) bar diameter c∕db greater than or equal to 2.0 is sufficient to avoid cracking of concrete under high temperature up to +80°C . The analytical model, presented in this paper, is in good agreement with the experimental results, particularly for negative temperature variations.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".