MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054385725 · doi:10.1117/12.2017875

Nondestructive testing of externally reinforced structures for seismic retrofitting using flax fiber reinforced polymer (FFRP) composites

2013· article· en· W2054385725 on OpenAlexaff
Clemente Ibarra‐Castanedo, Стефано Сфарра, Domenica Paoletti, A. Bendada, Xavier Maldague

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermography and Photoacoustic Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKenafMaterials scienceComposite materialFibre-reinforced plasticThermographyNondestructive testingGlass fiberEpoxyBast fibreRetrofittingSynthetic fiberNatural fiberStructural materialFiberStructural engineeringInfrared

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural fibers constitute an interesting alternative to synthetic fibers, e.g. glass and carbon, for the production of composites due to their environmental and economic advantages. The strength of natural fiber composites is on average lower compared to their synthetic counterparts. Nevertheless, natural fibers such as flax, among other bast fibers (jute, kenaf, ramie and hemp), are serious candidates for seismic retrofitting applications given that their mechanical properties are more suitable for dynamic loads. Strengthening of structures is performed by impregnating flax fiber reinforced polymers (FFRP) fabrics with epoxy resin and applying them to the component of interest, increasing in this way the load and deformation capacities of the building, while preserving its stiffness and dynamic properties. The reinforced areas are however prompt to debonding if the fabrics are not mounted properly. Nondestructive testing is therefore required to verify that the fabric is uniformly installed and that there are no air gaps or foreign materials that could instigate debonding. In this work, the use of active infrared thermography was investigated for the assessment of (1) a laboratory specimen reinforced with FFRP and containing several artificial defects; and (2) an actual FFRP retrofitted masonry wall in the Faculty of Engineering of the University of L’Aquila (Italy) that was seriously affected by the 2009 earthquake. Thermographic data was processed by advanced signal processing techniques, and post-processed by computing the watershed lines to locate suspected areas. Results coming from the academic specimen were compared to digital speckle photography and holographic interferometry images.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicThermography and Photoacoustic TechniquesFrench-language works237,207