MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770828898 · doi:10.3390/fib5040044

Hollow-Core FRP–Concrete–Steel Bridge Columns under Torsional Loading

2017· article· en· W2770828898 on OpenAlexaff
Sujith Anumolu, Omar I. Abdelkarim, Mohanad M. Abdulazeez, Ahmed Gheni, Mohamed A. ElGawady

Bibliographic record

VenueFibers · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNorthwestern University Transportation Center
KeywordsMaterials scienceFibre-reinforced plasticTorsion (gastropod)StiffnessComposite materialStructural engineeringTube (container)Core (optical fiber)Shell (structure)Column (typography)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the behavior of hollow-core fiber-reinforced polymer–concrete–steel (HC-FCS) columns under cyclic torsional loading combined with constant axial load. The HC-FCS consists of an outer fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) tube and an inner steel tube, with a concrete shell sandwiched between the two tubes. The FRP tube was stopped at the surface of the footing, and provided confinement to the concrete shell from the outer direction. The steel tube was embedded into the footing to a length of 1.8 times the diameter of the steel tube. The longitudinal and transversal reinforcements of the column were provided by the steel tube only. A large-scale HC-FCS column with a diameter of 24 in. (610 mm) and applied load height of 96 in. (2438 mm) with an aspect ratio of four was investigated during this study. The study revealed that the torsional behavior of the HC-FCS column mainly depended on the stiffness of the steel tube and the interactions among the column components (concrete shell, steel tube, and FRP tube). A brief comparison of torsional behavior was made between the conventional reinforced concrete columns and the HC-FCS column. The comparison illustrated that both column types showed high initial stiffness under torsional loading. However, the HC-FCS column maintained the torsion strength until a high twist angle, while the conventional reinforced concrete column did not.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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