Experimental fire testing of <scp>large‐scale</scp> glass fibre‐reinforced polymer<scp>‐reinforced</scp> concrete beams with <scp>mid‐span straight‐end</scp> bar lap splices
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Adopting glass fibre‐reinforced polymer (GFRP) rebars as a replacement of conventional steel reinforcement in different infrastructure applications is mainly attributed to its corrosion resistance and considerable lightweight‐to‐high strength ratio. However, the use of FRP rebars in construction is still limited due to the degradation of its mechanical properties at elevated temperatures. The experimental work presented in this paper aimed to investigate the structural fire behaviour of concrete beams reinforced with GFRP bars having lap splices at the beam mid‐span. Four identical 2750‐mm long concrete beams with cross‐sectional dimensions of 300 mm × 350 mm were experimentally examined under four‐point flexure bending. A 60‐mm thick concrete cover was used on the bottom, front and back sides of all beams. Two beams were tested as control specimens in ambient condition, while the other two beams were exposed to standard fire while subjected to a transverse load equivalent to 40% of the beam ultimate design moment. Experimental results show that concrete beams sustained the applied loads for a minimum of 53 minutes in standard fire conditions. Also, both test beams failed due to slippage of the spliced bars when the temperature measured at the top of the middle bar approached its glass transition temperature.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it