MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171493929 · doi:10.1139/l05-005

Bond strength of glass fibre reinforced polymer reinforcing bars in normal and self-consolidating concrete

2005· article· en· W2171493929 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Mohammad Reza Esfahani, M. Reza Kianoush, Mohamed Lachemi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFerdowsi University of MashhadNational Science Council
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceBond strengthComposite materialBondConcrete coverBar (unit)Structural engineeringSelf-consolidating concreteGlass fiberReinforced concreteCompressive strengthAdhesiveEngineeringLayer (electronics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an experimental study on bond strength of reinforcing bars made of glass fibre reinforced polymers (GFRP) embedded in normal and self-consolidating concrete. The study included pull-out tests of 36 GFRP reinforcing bars embedded in concrete specimens. Different parameters such as type of concrete, bar location, and cover thickness were considered as variables in different specimens. The results showed that the type of bond failure was by splitting of concrete for all specimens. The bond strength of bottom GFRP reinforcing bars was almost the same for both normal concrete and self-consolidating concrete. For the top bars, however, the bond strength of self-consolidating concrete was less than that of normal concrete.Key words: bond strength, glass FRP, reinforcing bars, top-bar effect, self-consolidating concrete.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207