Experimental Investigation on the Impact of Longitudinal Rebar Ratio on the Cracking Characteristics of R/C Components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cracking phenomenon in reinforced concrete members has troubled researchers and engineers worldwide due to the many mechanical parameters affecting this phenomenon. One such mechanical parameter is the longitudinal reinforcement ratio used for the detailing of structural components in reinforced concrete structures. Although, the percentage of rebar content has been studied, it is the first time that cracking behaviour is studied using varying ratios of rebars strained under a uniaxial tensile loading till a high degree of elongation found only at buildings sustained severe earthquake actions. This research is experimental. Four test specimens in the form of R/C ties are used and strained using a monotonic uniaxial tensile loading simulating the tensile type of loading during the first cycle of dynamic seismic action. All specimens are strained till an elongation degree equal to 30. The ratios used for the reinforcement of column specimens take values equal to 1.79%, 4.02%, 5.47% and 7.15%. Significant conclusions are reached concerning cracking behaviour for different longitudinal ratios, e.g., number of cracks, crack width, etc.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".