MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032382535 · doi:10.1680/stbu.2009.162.5.301

Strain localisations in FRP-confined concrete: new insights

2009· article· en· W2032382535 on OpenAlexafffund
Luke Bisby, W. Andy Take

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and Buildings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersRoyal Academy of EngineeringGovernment of Canada
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStrain (injury)Materials scienceDigital image correlationUltimate tensile strengthStructural engineeringTensile strainStrain gaugeLateral strainComposite materialCylinder stressEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circumferential confinement of reinforced concrete columns with externally bonded fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) wraps is now widely implemented as a method to strengthen and/or enhance the deformability of deficient or damaged reinforced concrete columns. A fundamentally important parameter in the design of these members is the so-called strain efficiency of the FRP wraps – the ratio of the tensile hoop strain in the FRP at failure to the average failure strain observed in direct uniaxial tensile coupon tests. Available experimental hoop strain data obtained using localised strain gauges provide little insight into the variation of hoop strain over the surface of FRP wraps, the factors influencing strain efficiency and the resulting strain efficiency that should be assumed in design, and these remain essentially unknown. In this paper, a novel digital image correlation technique is used to provide a detailed experimental quantification of the axial and hoop strain variation over the surface of FRP confined concrete cylinders. Potential implications for the analysis and design of FRP confined concrete are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations69
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and BuildingsSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207