Performance of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Circular Short Columns under Concentric, Eccentric, and Flexural Loads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents test results of seven large-scale circular concrete columns reinforced with either steel or glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcement. The columns measured 355 mm in diameter and 1,750 mm in length and were tested to failure under concentric, eccentric, or four-point bending configuration. Test parameters included the reinforcement type (GFRP and steel), the GFRP spiral pitch (50 and 85 mm), and varying ratios of eccentricity-to-column diameter (e/D = 0, 0.085, 0.17, and 0.34). The obtained axial capacity of the GFRP-reinforced concrete (RC) column was approximately 17% less than that of the steel-RC counterpart. However, for e/D = 0.085, the GFRP-RC column with a lesser spiral pitch exhibited approximately 10% more axial capacity than the column with a larger pitch. As the e/D ratio increases from 0 to 0.34 the axial capacity reduced by 32%, 39%, and 70% from the axial capacity of the concentric column. A “knee”-shaped interaction diagram for circular GFRP-RC columns was developed and compared with the predictions of available codes and guidelines for GFRP-RC 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".