Effect of freeze-thaw cycles on the bond durability between fibre reinforced polymer plate reinforcement and concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deterioration of infrastructure is one of the most pressing concerns facing today's civil engineering community. As a result, new rehabilitation techniques, such as the external bonding of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) plates and sheets, are being developed. To apply these rehabilitation methods in Canada, the durability of the rehabilitated structures in cold regions must be assessed. This paper examines the effects of freeze-thaw cycling on the bond between FRP and concrete. An experimental investigation was conducted using both single lap pull-off and bond beam specimens. Only uniaxial carbon FRP strips were considered. The specimens were exposed to up to 300 freeze-thaw cycles consisting of 16 h of freezing and 8 h of thawing in a water bath. After exposure, the specimens were tested to failure. The development of strain along the bond length and the failure mode are presented for both types of specimens. Load deflection curves are presented for the beam specimens. The results indicate that the bond between carbon FRP strips and concrete is not significantly damaged by up to 300 freeze-thaw cycles.Key words: reinforced concrete, repair, rehabilitation, strengthening, fibre reinforced polymers, freeze-thaw, bond damage.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".