Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of an efficient and durable bridge deck system is a priority for most highway departments worldwide. This paper summarizes the results of an experimental program designed to study the behaviour of innovative glass-fiber-reinforced-polymer (GFRP) bridge deck modules and their transverse connection. The deck consisted of a number of triangular filament-wound tubes bonded with epoxy resin. Pultruded GFRP laminates were adhered to the top and bottom of the tubes to create one modular unit. The experimental program described in this paper discusses the evolution of the last two generations of the bridge deck. The description of the first and second deck generations was presented in an earlier paper. For the third-generation GFRP deck, a full-scale prototype specimen was subjected to 2 × 106 cycles at 135% of the service load level and was tested to failure afterward. The fourth-generation bridge deck system was fabricated by optimizing the weight of the deck section and then tested to failure. The performance was evaluated on the basis of load capacity, failure mode, deflection at service load level, and stiffness degradation under cyclic loading. Another phase of the work was to establish a means of connecting adjacent deck panels. A GFRP shear key was designed, manufactured, and installed in a full-scale deck module to address this need. Assessment of the structural adequacy in both resisting repeated loading and transmitting loads between adjacent deck modules is presented. The GFRP deck system with and without the shear key was capable of resisting 2 × 106 cycles of an equivalent American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials HS30-design truck wheel load plus the dynamic load allowance of the bridge deck.Key words: bridge decks, advanced composite materials, shear key, glass fibers, fiber-reinforced polymers, filament winding, pultrusion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".