Thermal Compatibility and Bond Strength of FRP Reinforcement in Prestressed Concrete Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to concerns with corrosion, the use of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) as a replacement to conventional steel reinforcement has greatly increased over the last decade. However, when considering thermal gradients, many researchers have identified differential swelling between FRP reinforcement and concrete. This can lead to the development of splitting tensile stresses within the concrete cover surrounding the reinforcing bar and deterioration of the bond between the materials. A total of ten beams were therefore tested in flexure to investigate bond strength deterioration arising from thermal cycles ranging between −40 and +40°C. Beams were cast at +20°C and prestressed with either glass FRP (GFRP) or carbon FRP (CFRP) tendons. Additionally, the level of damage expected in the concrete cover of the specimens was predicted on the basis of linear elastic and nonlinear finite element analyses of thermally induced stresses. Although damage was theoretically expected, experimental results showed excellent bond performance of GFRP and CFRP tendons in concrete based on material properties and concrete cover requirements adopted for the project.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".