Research on the Use of FRP for Critical Load-Bearing Infrastructure in Conflict Zones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research into the use of fiber-reinforced polymers (FRPs) in structures at the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) during the past two decades has largely focused on two important military engineering goals—mobility and survivability. FRP research in the area of mobility has included the strengthening and repair of reinforced concrete beams and slabs and the development of portable lightweight bridges suitable for most wheeled and tracked vehicles. With respect to survivability, a particular interest is in the use of FRPs to enhance the blast resistance of structural columns and beams. Such research may be equally pertinent to improving the blast resistance of a broad range of critical domestic infrastructure worldwide, given both the increasing concerns about terrorist acts and the desire as well to improve resistance to accidental explosion. This paper will report on the experimental work of two of the most recent FRP research projects carried out at the RMC in support of military objectives—the development of a lightweight portable glass FRP bridge and the use of FRP to strengthen reinforced concrete structural columns against blast. A full-sized FRP box beam was constructed and tested in the laboratory and 28 half-scale reinforced concrete columns, some strengthened with either steel reinforced polymer (SRP) or with FRP, were tested in the field under blast load. From this research, it can be seen that FRP as a structural material offers significant advantages to military forces working in conflict zones, whether for traditional strengthening of damaged or understrength structures, lightweight portable bridge options, or as a means of strengthening structures against blast effects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".