Durability of Concrete Cylinders Wrapped with GFRP Made from Furfuryl Alcohol Bioresin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very limited studies exist on the durability of “green” biocomposites, particularly resins, in the context of structural engineering applications. This paper investigates the durability of concrete cylinders wrapped with glass fiber reinforced bioresin made from furfuryl alcohol extracted from renewable sources such as corncobs and sugar cane. Conditioning was achieved by immersion of various groups of glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP)-wrapped 153×305 mm cylinders in saline solutions with 3% salt concentration, at 23, 40, and 55°C, for up to 300 days. The groups included control specimens fabricated with conventional epoxy resin for comparison and plain concrete cylinders. Specimens were then tested in axial compression, periodically, at 29, 97, 182, and 300 days. It was shown that control unconditioned epoxy-GFRP and bioresin-GFRP wrapped cylinders had the same strengthening ratio (fcc′/fc′). After conditioning for 300 days, the (fcc′/fc′) ratio retentions for the bioresin-GFRP was 73% at all temperatures, and were 81, 76, and 76% for the epoxy-GFRP at the 23, 40, and 55°C, respectively. Statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out and showed that the small difference in the 300 days’ strength between the bioresin-GFRP and epoxy-GFRP specimens is statistically significant at the 23°C only, but not at 40°C and 55°C.
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".