Experimental Study on Concrete Columns Confined with External FRP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that confinement with FRP (fibre reinforced polymer) jackets is a useful reinforcement technique to improve the strength and ductility of concrete columns subjected to axial compression loads, especially in those that have a circular cross section.This strengthening method is less effective for elements with square or rectangular sections in which, unlike the circular ones, the FRP confinement is not uniform.However, concrete columns with non-circular cross section are very common in construction, so it is essential to be able to estimate adequately the ultimate capacity of the reinforced element depending on the shape of the section.Most of the international guidelines for the design and calculation of this type of reinforcements recognize this circumstance and incorporate a shape factor, although there is no unanimity in their proposals.This paper presents the preliminary results of an experimental study on intermediate-sized concrete specimens reinforced with FRP jackets.Special attention is paid to two parameters related to the section shape that have an important impact on the efficiency of the reinforcement on rectangular sections: the aspect ratio of the cross section or relationship between the sides of the concrete section (b/d) and the radius of curvature of the corners (Rc).This work is part of a research project that includes a larger experimental program with full-scale tests.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".