MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202921240 · doi:10.1520/jte20200661

Modeling of Supplemental Bar-Mounted Fiber Optic Strain Sensor for Structural Health Monitoring Applications

2021· article· en· W3202921240 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Rahmatian, Hussam Saleem, Ashutosh Bagchi, Michelle Nokken, Khaled Galal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStructural health monitoringBar (unit)Optical fiberStrain (injury)Fiber optic sensorMaterials scienceStructural engineeringComposite materialFiberEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Fiber optic sensors have been increasingly utilized in structural health monitoring of large-scale civil structures. Bare fiber sensors are quite brittle, and therefore, their installation and embedment in reinforced concrete elements can be challenging, particularly when using uncommon materials as internal reinforcements in concrete. In the present study, a fiber optic strain sensor is preinstalled on a supplemental bar of adequate length and appropriate diameter. The sensor is attached to a glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcing bar in concrete flexural element. Performance under static-loading conditions has been evaluated, and the results have shown potential toward applying the technique to large-scale structures. Another objective of the present study is to develop a numerical model that represents the interaction between the concrete, the reinforcement steel, and the supplemental GFRP rebar, which has the sensor mounted on. The model is calibrated using experimental results. The model can be used to investigate varying parameters including material properties (e.g., compressive strength of concrete), geometrical data (e.g., the length of the supplemental rebar), and loading and boundary conditions, consequently eliminating the need to perform a large number of full-scale costly experiments. The developed model exhibited nearly identical behavior to the experiments after calibration. The study shows that the performance of the present sensing system is primarily affected by the relative sizes of the main and supplemental bars.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Testing and EvaluationSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207