MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deflection Prediction of Steel and FRP-Reinforced Concrete-Filled FRP Tube Beams

2010· article· en· W2122740772 on OpenAlexafffund
Hamdy M. Mohamed, Radhouane Masmoudi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCystic Fibrosis Foundation Therapeutics
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStiffeningMaterials scienceStructural engineeringDeflection (physics)Flexural strengthComposite materialReinforcementEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of experimental and theoretical investigations that study the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete-filled fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) tubes (RCFFTs) beams. The experimental program consists of 10 circular beams [6 RCFFT and 4 control reinforced concrete (RC) beams] with a total length of 2,000 mm, tested under four-point bending load. The experimental results were used to review and verify the applicability of various North American code provisions and some available equations in the literature to predict deflection of RCFFT beams. The measured deflections and the experimental values of the effective moment of inertia were analyzed and compared with those predicted using available models. The results of the analysis indicated that the behavior of steel and FRP-RCFFT beams under the flexural load was significantly different than that of steel and FRP-RC members. This is attributed to the confining effect of the FRP tubes and their axial contribution. This confining behavior in turn enhanced the overall flexural behavior and improved the tension stiffening of RCFFT beams. For that, the predicted tension stiffening of steel and FRP-RCFFT beams using the conventional equations (steel or FRP-RC member) underestimates the flexural response; therefore, the predicted deflections are overestimated. Based on the analysis of the test results, the Branson’s equation for the effective moment of inertia of RC structures is modified, and new equations are developed to accurately predict the deflection of concrete-filled FRP tube (CFFT) beams reinforced with steel or FRP bars.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composites for ConstructionSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207