Experimental study of the strength and deformations of carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) retrofitted reinforced concrete slabs under blast loadThis article is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Blast Engineering.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blast response and ultimate resistance of reinforced concrete slabs externally strengthened with carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) laminates were investigated. Five square slab specimens, 1 m on a side, were retrofitted with 500 mm wide CFRP laminates bonded to their top and bottom surfaces. Another four nominally identical unretrofitted slabs were used as control specimens. Four of the retrofitted and the four control slabs were first subjected to the detonation of either 22.4 or 33.4 kg of explosive at a stand-off distance of 3.0 m. For reference, the fifth retrofitted slab was only statically tested to failure. Blast pressures and impulses and slab deformations were measured. After exposure to the blast, the slabs that were not completely damaged were statically tested to failure. Overall the retrofitted slabs performed better than the control slabs, but one retrofitted slab completely failed under the blast load while none of the control slabs experienced complete failure under similar load.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".