MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Confinement Properties of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Circular Columns under Simulated Seismic Loading

2020· article· en· W3112483422 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amr E. Abdallah, Ehab El-Salakawy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringMaterials scienceReinforcementComposite materialTransverse planeReinforced concrete columnCompressive strengthColumn (typography)EngineeringConnection (principal bundle)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Columns in earthquake-resistant reinforced concrete (RC) structures need to be adequately confined to provide satisfactory levels of stability and deformability. In circular RC columns, confinement can be provided by spirals or hoops. This paper presents an investigation of the glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) confinement reinforcement requirements in columns of moment-resisting frames. Six full-scale circular RC columns were tested under simultaneous axial loading and unidirectional cyclic lateral drift reversals. The studied parameters were longitudinal reinforcement type, transverse reinforcement shape and pitch, and axial load level. Test results indicated that the maximum spiral pitch of one-fourth the gross diameter of the column as per the Canadian code for FRP-RC structures was reasonable and sufficiently conservative. In addition, GFRP circular hoops require larger lap splice length than that specified by the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code to provide comparable confinement to GFRP spirals. The experimental results were estimated by a simplified method based on available confinement models, codes and guidelines for FRP-RC structures. It is recommended to consider the compressive strength of GFRP longitudinal bars with a compressive strain limit of 0.002 in circular GFRP-RC columns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composites for ConstructionSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207