Assessment of concrete-to-steel bond behaviour of reinforced concrete structures using acoustic emission intensity analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental study was performed to utilize acoustic emission (AE) intensity analysis for the assessment of the concrete-to-steel bond behaviour of reinforced concrete structures. A total of 18 reinforced concrete unconfined prism samples were tested in a direct pullout test setup under incrementally increasing monotonic loading as being constantly monitored with attached AE sensors. The samples were cast using variable bar diameter (10, 20, 35 mm) and bar embedded length (50, 100, 200 mm). Different AE signals parameters were recorded throughout the tests until failure including rise time, counts, number of hits, signal strength, energy, amplitude, duration, and frequency values. Moreover, an AE intensity analysis was applied on AE signal strength results to produce two additional AE parameters: historic index (H (t)) and severity (Sr). Results demonstrated that cumulative signal strength (CSS) correlated well with different degrees of loss of bond from micro-cracking till bond splitting failure, which resulted in cover cracking or delamination. The review of CSS, H (t), and Sr curves allowed the detection of two progressive stages of bond deterioration (micro-cracking and macro-cracking) in all tested specimens. Intensity analysis parameters (H (t) and Sr) were employed to create bond damage classification chart to evaluate the concrete-to-steel bond condition in reinforced concrete structures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".