Blast retrofit of one-way reinforced concrete members using externally bonded FRP and FRP anchorage
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
This paper presents the results of nine as-built and carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) retrofitted reinforced concrete panels subjected to simulated blast loading using a pneumatically operated shock tube. The objective of the study was to characterize the blast response of CFRP retrofitted reinforced concrete panels, with and without supplemental mechanical anchorage applied to the CFRP. The results indicate that retrofitting can significantly increase the strength and stiffness of reinforced concrete flexure members and greatly enhance the displacement time-history response over non-retrofitted members. Debonding of the externally bonded CFRP was the failure mode for all retrofitted members. FRP anchors, designed to prevent or delay debonding failures through mechanical end-anchorage, were found to substantially enhance the performance of panels experiencing critical diagonal crack debonding. However, the FRP anchors were found to have no substantial effect on retrofit performance for the case plate-end interfacial debonding failures. In addition, the displacement time-histories for as-built and FRP retrofitted panel obtained through detail single degree of freedom analysis were found correlate well with those obtained experimentally. Finally, a discussion on the practical considerations of using externally bonded FRP retrofits to resist blast loads and recommendations for protective design are presented.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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