AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF FAILURE MODES IN SHORT SPAN FRP REINFORCED GLULAM BEAMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the Canadian bridge code has provisions for fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) timber stringers, the lack of tools and limited understanding of the structural behaviour prevents widespread adoption, specifically for glulam beams.Thus, an experimental investigation examining the effects of FRP reinforcement configurations on short span glulam beams was undertaken.A total of fourteen glulam beams were tested to failure under four-point bending with five of them being unreinforced and the remaining nine reinforced with two or four layers of simple tension and Ushaped tension FRP reinforcement.In comparison to the unreinforced beams, FRP reinforced beams were observed to have an increase in maximum load with a lower maximum displacement.Although the addition of FRP reinforcement contributed to an increase in strength and stiffness, the primary failure mode changed from pure flexure, as found in the unreinforced beams, to longitudinal shear, tension perpendicular-to-grain or a combination of brittle failure modes.The brittle failure modes can be attributed to insufficient development lengths, the low shear span to depth ratio, and the inherent low shear strength of the tested glulam.These factors need to be considered in future models to accurately predict the structural behaviour of short span glulam beams in flexure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".