MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of Physical and Durability Characteristics of New Headed Glass Fiber–Reinforced Polymer Bars for Concrete Structures

2016· article· en· W2513330974 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceDurabilityComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthBar (unit)Glass fiberScanning electron microscopeChristian ministryCompressive strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of a collaborative research project between Quebec’s Ministry of Transportation and Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation, which aimed at characterizing a new type of headed glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcing bar and evaluating its suitability as internal reinforcement for concrete structures. To achieve these objectives, the project was implemented in three stages: (1) evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties; (2) determination of the pullout behavior in concrete; and (3) characterization of the long-term durability of the headed GFRP bars. A total of 57 specimens embedded in a 200-mm concrete cube were tested with the direct pullout test to investigate the effect of confinement, bar size, concrete compressive strength, and exposure conditions on the pullout behavior of the headed GFRP bars. Simultaneously, microstructural analyses and measurements of the physicochemical and mechanical properties were carried out on conditioned and unconditioned headed GFRP bars. The results show that the materials, geometry, and interface configuration of the head provided very good mechanical interlocking to the GFRP bars. Up to 63 and 53% of the guaranteed tensile strength of the straight GFRP bars were achieved for 15.9- and 19-mm diameter bars with headed ends, respectively. Scanning electron microscopy and differential scanning calorimetry showed no material changes in the head and bars after exposure to alkaline solution and freeze–thaw cycling. Exposure to the alkaline solution under sustained loading had the most detrimental effect, with the bar retaining 79.4% of its pullout strength. The results indicate that the tested headed GFRP bar has suitable mechanical and durability properties for use as reinforcement in concrete bridge components.

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.

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 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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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