MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055874499 · doi:10.1177/0731684411399944

Improved interdigital sensors for structural health monitoring of composite retrofit systems

2011· article· en· W2055874499 on OpenAlexaff
Amr A. Nassr, Wael El‐Dakhakhni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCapacitanceSlabStructural health monitoringRetrofittingComposite numberStructural engineeringFinite element methodComposite materialSIGNAL (programming language)DielectricDependency (UML)Noise (video)AcousticsComputer scienceEngineeringOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, an improved sensor performance based on detecting the dielectric variations in composite—concrete interface and linking these variations to bond deterioration is presented. The use of composites in retrofitting concrete structures is becoming a standard technique worldwide. The bond between the composite system and the concrete element surface is essential to ensure achieving the designed performance. However, there is little research on the development of an economic structural health monitoring technique for monitoring bond quality in large structures, such as buildings and bridges. The improved sensing technique utilizes an Interdigital Capacitance Sensor design to increase the signal-to-noise ratio and to detect shallow—depth bond deteriorations. An analytical modeling technique was used to analyze the influence of the different sensor parameters, especially the dependency of the capacitance signals on the sensor geometrical dimensions. Two-dimensional finite element (FE) simulations were also used to assess different related design parameters and to verify the experimental results. A concrete slab retrofitted with composites containing pre-induced air voids to simulate bond deteriorations defects were constructed and inspected in a laboratory setting. Good agreements were found between experimental capacitance signal response parameters and those predicated from the FE simulations of the slab specimen.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and CompositesSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207