Bond behavior of high strength concrete under reversed pull-out cyclic loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structures located in seismic zones require significant ductility. It is necessary to examine the bond slip characteristics of high strength concrete under cyclic loading. The cyclic bond of high strength concrete is investigated under different parameters, including load history, confining reinforcement, bar diameter, concrete strength, and the rate of pull out. The bond strength, cracking, and deformation are highly dependent on the bond slip behavior between the rebar and the concrete under cyclic loading. The results of cyclic testing indicate that an increase in cyclic displacement will lead to more severe bond damage. The slope of the bond stress displacement curve can describe the influence of the rate of loading on the bond strength in a cyclic test. Specimens with steel confinement sustained a greater number of cycles than the specimens without steel confinement. It has been found that the maximum bond strength increases with an increase in concrete strength. Cyclic loading does not affect the bond strength of high strength concrete as long as the cyclic slip is less than the maximum slip for monotonic loading. The behavior of high strength concrete under a cyclic load is slightly different from that of normal strength concrete.Key words: bond, high strength, cyclic loading, bar spacing, loading rate, failure mechanism.
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".