MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187229820 · doi:10.3390/technologies3040238

C-Anchor for Strengthening the Connection between Adhesively Bonded Laminates and Concrete Substrates

2015· article· en· W2187229820 on OpenAlexaff
A. Ghani Razaqpur, Ahmed Mostafa

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnologies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceStructural engineeringCrackingDeflection (physics)Beam (structure)Composite materialStiffnessLimitingFlexural strengthUltimate failureUltimate tensile strengthEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) anchor is developed and tested to delay debonding in reinforced concrete (RC) beams externally strengthened with FRP laminate/sheet. The C-shape anchor is made from a commercially available CFRP grid. The anchors legs are 95 mm long while the spacing between the legs is adjustable, depending on FRP laminate and beam widths. Nine full scale RC beams, 3.0 m long, 250 mm wide and 400 mm deep, were strengthened with CFRP laminate/sheet, with and without the C-anchor. The main test parameters were the type and amount of FRP laminate and the presence/absence of the anchor. Test results showed that beams with the anchor had generally 5%–10% higher debonding and failure load, and they reached higher deflection at failure than the companion beams without anchors. Although complete separation of the FRP laminate from the concrete was not observed in any of the beams with anchors, there was noticeable slip at failure at one end of the laminate. A significant outcome of the study is that anchors are effective in limiting the extent of debonding along the laminate, thus contributing to the flexural stiffness of the beam by reducing the extent of cracking and limiting the crack width along the beam. Finally, the anchor allowed the FRP to reach or exceed its theoretically allowable strain computed based on the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 440 recommendation while in none of the beams without anchors, the FRP reached its theoretically allowable strain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnologiesSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207