Anisotropic fibre-reinforced plastics as formworks for single and double-curved textile reinforced concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new constructive and technological approach was developed for the efficient production of large-dimensioned, curved freeform formworks, which allows the manufacturing of single and double-curved textile reinforced concrete elements. The approach is based on a flexible, multi-layered formwork system, which consists of glass-fibre reinforced plastic (GFRP). Using the unusual structural behavior caused by anisotropy, these GFRP formwork elements permit a specific adjustment of defined curvature. The system design of the developed GFRP formwork and the concrete-lightweight-elements with stabilized spacer fabric was examined exhaustively. Prototypical curved freeform surfaces with different curvature radii were designed, numerically computed and produced. Furthermore, the fabric’s contour accuracy of the fabric was verified, and its integration was adjusted to loads. The developed textile reinforced concrete (TRC) had 3-point bending tensile strength of 41.51 MPa. Beyond that, it was ensured that the TRC had a high durability, which has been shown by the capillary suction of de-icing solution and freeze thaw test with a total amount of scaled material of 1172 g/m² and a relative dynamic E-Modulus of 100% after 28 freeze-thaw cycles.
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".