Externally bonded carbon fiber–reinforced polymer composites for seismic retrofit of reinforced concrete coupling beams designed according to old codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large number of existing buildings have seismic-resistant systems designed according to old code provisions. These structural systems exhibit non-ductile behavior and can present a significant risk in the case of a moderate or significant seismic event. Reinforced concrete–coupled shear walls designed to old codes and standards are among those deficient structures that need to be seismically upgraded. This article aims to investigate a new retrofitting and upgrading method using externally bonded carbon fiber–reinforced polymer composites for existing or/and damaged reinforced concrete coupling beams that can improve the seismic performance of them during earthquakes. To this end, an experimental test was conducted to evaluate the seismic behavior of two identical reinforced concrete–coupled shear wall specimens under reverse cyclic loading. To simulate the old existing building, the specimens were designed and constructed according to the old 1941 National Building Code of Canada with a conventionally reinforced coupling beam. One of the specimens was tested as a control, and the other was strengthened using externally bonded carbon fiber–reinforced polymer composites to evaluate the improvement in its seismic performance. Results show that the retrofit using externally bonded carbon fiber–reinforced polymer resulted in significant enhancement in strength and energy dissipation capacity compared to the conventionally reinforced coupling beam from the control specimen. In addition, externally bonded carbon fiber–reinforced polymer sheets resulted in much improved hysteretic and ductile behavior and in lesser strength and stiffness degradation.
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) | 0.000 | 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".