Anchorage Capacity of Concrete Bridge Barriers Reinforced with GFRP Bars with Headed Ends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental program was conducted to investigate the application of headed glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) ribbed bars at the barrier wall-deck anchorage. Six full-scale barrier models of 1,200 mm in length were erected and tested under static monotonic loading to determine their ultimate load-carrying capacities and failure modes with respect to the barrier wall-deck anchorage. Four PL-2 barrier specimens were cast: two of them were of tapered face and the other two specimens were of parapet type with constant thickness. Each set had a steel-reinforced specimen as the control model and a GFRP-reinforced specimen. In addition, two PL-3 GFRP-reinforced specimens were erected with different spacing of GFRP bars. Each specimen was loaded laterally until collapse. This paper presents the results from these tests in the form of crack pattern, deflection history, and ultimate load-carrying capacity. Experimental results were compared with the design values specified in the Canadian bridge code for barrier anchorage into the deck slabs, showing a large margin of safety for the proposed GFRP-reinforced barriers. In addition, a parametric study was undertaken using finite-element analysis to investigate the applicability of resultant design loads prescribed by the Canadian bridge code for the design of the barrier wall-deck anchorage. The key parameters considered in this study were deck overhang length and thickness and barrier length. The data generated from this parametric study were used to develop set of empirical expressions for the factored applied moment at the barrier-deck interface, as well as the factored tensile force required to design the deck slab cantilever.
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".