Enhancing the behaviour of FRP RC Slabs using square FRP bars and Fiber Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) bars are gaining increasing acceptance in construction industry particularly in aggressive environments. Enhancing the serviceability behavior is of main points that still require further investigations. In this paper a solution for the bond and serviceability enhancement is proposed through modifying the bar shape and enhancing the concrete properties. Newly developed square glass-FRP (GFRP) bars were fabricated, tested, and the behavior was compared with circular GFRP and steel bars. The physical and mechanical properties of GFRP square and circular bars are presented. An experimental study of oneway concrete slabs reinforced with the developed square and circular GFRP and steel bars was performed. A total of 9 full-scale RC slabs were fabricated and tested up to failure to study the effect ofthe test parameters: type of reinforcement (steel versus GFRP), bar cross section shape, concrete compressive strength, reinforcement ratio of longitudinal bars, and the use of polypropylene fiber ratio. Based on the experimental test results, it was found that the bond strength of GFRP bars increased by increasing the polypropylene fiber. Also, changing the bar surface area from circular to square cross section, resulted in a slight increased in the bond strength. In addation, the behavior and ultimate flexural loads of concrete slabs reinforced with GFRP square bars were improved compared with concrete slabs reinforced with GFRP circular bars. Increasing the concrete compressive strength, resulted in improvement of the behavior of concrete slabs with GFRP square bars.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".