MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bond Performance of Basalt Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bars to Concrete

2014· article· en· W2061329829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticEmbedmentMaterials scienceBasalt fiberComposite materialBond strengthBar (unit)Slip (aerodynamics)PolymerGlass fiberBondStructural engineeringFiberAdhesiveLayer (electronics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the test results of a study on the bond behavior of basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars to concrete. Thirty six concrete cylinders reinforced with BFRP bars and twelve cylinders reinforced with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars were tested in direct pullout conditions. Test parameters included the FRP material (basalt and glass), the bar diameter, and the bar embedment length in concrete. Bond-slip curves of BFRP and GFRP bars revealed similar trends. BFRP bars developed average bond strength 75% of that of GFRP bars. All BFRP specimens failed in a pullout mode of failure along the interfacial surface between the outer layer of the bar and the subsequent core layers. The influence of various parameters on the overall bond performance of BFRP bars is analyzed and discussed. The well-known BPE and modified-BPE analytical models were calibrated to describe the bond-slip relationships of the bars. Test results demonstrate the promise of using the BFRP bars as an alternative to the GFRP bars in reinforcing concrete elements.

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.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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