Flexural Behavior of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Masonry Beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental and analytical study is conducted in order to investigate the flexural behavior of masonry beams that are internally reinforced using glass fiber-reinforced polymers (GFRP) rebars. Seven reinforced masonry beams with 4.0- and 2.4-m spans were tested under four-point bending setup. The beams were loaded monotonically up to failure. One had two courses of hollow concrete masonry units and the remaining six beams had three courses. Two masonry beams were reinforced using conventional steel rebars and were considered as the control specimens. The remaining five beams were internally reinforced using GFRP rods with different reinforcement ratios. Beams were detailed to have sufficient shear reinforcement such that they do not fail in shear. Flexural capacity, deformation, curvature, and strains of the tested GFRP-reinforced and steel-reinforced masonry beams were compared and discussed. Using the acquired data from the experimental and analytical studies, effectiveness of GFRP rods as internal reinforcement for concrete masonry beams is demonstrated.
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) | 0.001 | 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".