Design and evaluation of a new bond-type anchorage system for fiber reinforced polymer tendons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corrosion resistance, high strength, and advantageous strength-to-weight ratio enable fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) to have substantial potential to replace steel tendons in prestressed applications. One of the main technical obstacles to wide use of FRPs in the construction industry is the methodology to anchor FRP tendons to achieve their full strength. High tensile to compression and shear strength ratios make it necessary to develop a new anchorage design concept for FRP tendons. This paper gives a literature review of bond-type anchorage systems and the mechanics of stress transfer by bond from FRP tendons to grout and reports an experimental study on a newly developed bond-type anchorage system with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) Leadline 8-mm-diameter rods. The test program consisted of nine monotonic tensile tests, two pullout tests, and two proving tests on the anchorage system with Leadline single- or 9-rod tendons. The test results showed that the developed anchorage system with 250-mm bond length ensures full development of the tensile strength of Leadline mono-rod tendons. The bond strength of Leadline 9-rod tendons is 14 MPa for a bond length of 95 mm, 62% of that of mono-rod ones with a bond length of 80 mm. The anchorage system with a 400-mm bond length gives at least 90% of the tensile strength of Leadline 9-rod tendons and also demonstrates an acceptable sustained loading behaviour in accordance with existing codes.Key words: anchorage, bond stress, creep, grout, polymers, rod, slip, tendon.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".