Experimental Study of Hollow Fibre Reinforced Polymer Piles in Soft Clay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, a research program aimed at investigating the performance of fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) piles in soft clays is presented.The main goal was to determine and characterize the interface shear strength properties of carbon and glass FRPs against clays, identify the influence of material selection and fiber orientation, and compare these results to the performance of traditional piling materials such as steel and concrete.FRP materials have experienced a surge in interest during the recent decades due to their favourable properties such as resistance to corrosion and degradation in comparison to steel and concrete particularly in harsh or contaminated soil conditions such as waterfront applications.The first experimental program investigates interface shear strength using a direct shear box apparatus.The second experimental program expands on the previous work through conducting static pile load tests under axial and lateral loading conditions of small scale FRP and steel piles in soft clays.The results of this experimental testing indicates that for all of the FRP interfaces tested in both element and small scale pile load tests, the interface shear strength is higher or at least on par with steel interfaces.Material selection and orientation had a limited role on pile performance as most FRP piles presented similar interface shear strength results.The findings presented in this work show that the FRP piles are a viable alternative to steel piles.Further studies in the form of full scale pile load tests are needed in order to corroborate the results presented herein.
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) | 0.002 | 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".