Performance of Axially Loaded Short Rectangular Columns Strengthened with Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Wrapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents results of a comprehensive experimental investigation on the behavior of axially loaded short rectangular columns that have been strengthened with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) wrap. Six series, a total of 90 specimens, of uniaxial compression tests were conducted on rectangular and square short columns. The behavior of the specimens in the axial and transverse directions is investigated. The parameters considered in this study are (1) the concrete strength; (2) the aspect ratio of the cross section; and (3) the number of CFRP layers. The findings of this research can be summarized as follows: The CFRP wrapping enhances the compressive strength and the ductility of both square and rectangular columns, but to a lesser degree than that of circular columns. The ultimate strength and the ductility of the CFRP confined concrete increase with increasing number of confining layers. The increase in strength and ductility is more significant for lower strength concrete, representing poor or degraded concrete, than for normal-to-high strength concrete; that is, the maximum gain in strength that can be achieved for 3 ksi concrete wrapped columns is approximately 90%, as compared to only 30% for 6 ksi concrete wrapped columns. The CFRP confining jacket must be sufficiently stiff to develop appropriate confining forces at relatively low axial strain levels. The gain in compressive strength obtained by the CFRP confined concrete depends mainly on the relative stiffness of the CFRP jacket to the axial stiffness of the column.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".