MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466871129 · doi:10.1080/19386362.2016.1198109

Axial and lateral load transfer of fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) piles in soft clay

2016· article· en· W2466871129 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Giraldo Valez, Mohammad T. Rayhani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geotechnical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticPileMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringStiffnessWavinessComposite materialDisplacement (psychology)GeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation on the performance of fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) piles in soft clay. The load transfer behaviour of small-scale FRP piles manufactured using either glass or carbon fibres is analysed and compared to that of traditional steel piles, in order to assess the viability of FRPs as piling materials. In addition, the effects of FRP material and fibre orientation on pile behaviour are investigated with the goal of identifying the optimal conditions for best performance. In all cases, the FRP piles present higher or at least similar capacity compared to steel piles. FRP surface topology, pile texture and waviness pattern dictated by the fibre weaving and orientation were found to exert a significant influence on the pile axial capacity. The lower stiffness of the FRP piles leads to increased pile head displacement under lateral loading compared to steel piles.

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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207