MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320168822 · doi:10.1061/jccof2.cceng-4074

Experimental and Analytical Study of Bond Stress–Slip Behavior at the CFRP-to-Concrete Interface

2023· article· en· W4320168822 on OpenAlexaff
Abbas Fathi, Georges El-Saikaly, Omar Chaallal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSlippageCarbon fiber reinforced polymerBondStructural engineeringComposite materialReinforced concreteDuctility (Earth science)Slip (aerodynamics)Bond strengthFibre-reinforced plasticAdhesiveCreepLayer (electronics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of externally bonded (EB) carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) systems for strengthening existing structures, such as RC beams, has been widely approved in the construction industry worldwide for its numerous benefits. The CFRP-to-concrete bond has a governing role in the reliability and effectiveness of EB-CFRP systems. Indeed, failure of the CFRP-to-concrete bond can lead to rupture of CFRP-strengthened structures. Hence, ongoing research into assessment of bond behavior at the CFRP-to-concrete interface helps to bring more insightful clarity to the use of EB-CFRP strengthening techniques. The aim of this study is to evaluate the bond behavior between CFRP and concrete by conducting a series of pullout tests. The parameters considered include CFRP type (sheet versus laminate), bonded length, and bonded CFRP width. The results show that using CFRP fabric sheets can contribute to higher bond load-carrying capacity and ductility than CFRP laminates. Furthermore, through the analyses of databases in the literature, a bilinear bond–slip model is proposed that takes into account the CFRP width factor. Through a comparison, it is shown that the proposed model performs well in terms of predicting the maximum local bond stress and CFRP slippage.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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