Mechanical and bond properties of new generation of carbon fibre reinforced polymer reinforcing bars for concrete structures
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents laboratory test results on the mechanical properties and bond strength of new generation of carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) reinforcing bars used as nonprestressed reinforcement for concrete structures. Two types of CFRP reinforcing bars, namely, 9-mm-diameter CFRP ribbed bars and 9.5-mm-diameter CFRP sand-coated bars, were investigated. Tensile tests and pullout bond tests were conducted to evaluate the tensile properties and bond strength of the CFRP bars in comparison with that of the steel bar. Experimental results showed that the tensile stress-strain curves of the CFRP bars were linear up to failure. The ultimate tensile strength of the two types of CFRP bars was at least 1500 MPa, three times that of steel bars. The modulus of elasticity of two types of the CFRP bars was 128145 GPa, about 6575% that of steel. Furthermore, both types of the CFRP bars exhibited almost the same bond strength to concrete similar to steel bars. The minimum bond development length for the two types of CFRP bars seemed to be equal to about 20d b for the sand-coated bars and 30d b for the ribbed bars.Key words: fibre reinforced polymer (FRP), carbon FRP (CFRP), bar, mechanical properties, tensile strength, embedded length, pullout, bond strength, concrete structures.
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 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 it