Development of GFRP-Reinforced Bridge Barrier Deck-Slab System for Sustainable Construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the past decade, Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) has been significantly utilized as an alternative to steel reinforcement, as the corrosion of black steel reinforcement subjected to severe environmental conditions leads to structural stability concerns. In Canada, as the bridge superstructures are exposed to such a harsh environment, developing a cost-effective and sustainable design with GFRP reinforced for bridge deck slabs and barrier walls are essential. This dissertation presents six phases of research conducted in the design of GFRP reinforced concrete bridge barrier. In phase I, an extensive study has been conducted on the GFRP bars as anchorage for the TL-5 barrier-deck slab connection. In this phase, seven configurations of GFRP-reinforced barrier detailing, using two different bar profiles, were studied. In phase II, a full-scale TL-5 bridge barrier with special profile GFRP hooked bar anchors as connecting bars to the deck slab was constructed and subjected to static transverse loading at both interior and exterior locations to determine its ultimate load-carrying capacity, failure mode and crack patterns. In phase III, an innovative GFRP bridge barrier design based on the adopted barrier configurations specified by the Ministry of Transportation of Quebec (MTQ) has been developed, four configurations of GFRP-reinforced barrier detailing, using headed-end GFRP bars, were constructed. The proposed barrier specimens were tested to determine their ultimate load carrying capacities and failure modes. In phases IV and V, the anchorage capacity of a newly developed GFRP hooked bar was investigated. Four configurations of full-size TL-5 and TL4 GFRP-reinforced barrier detailing, using reduced-size180 ̊ hooked GFRP bars, were constructed. The proposed barriers were tested to determine their ultimate load carrying capacities and failure modes. In phase VI, a thorough investigation of pullout strength and bond behaviour of post-installed GFRP bars subjected to wet and dry freeze and thaw cycles has been performed. A total of 180 concrete cubes were cast and tested under monotonic pull-out force till failure. In summary, this research led to a sustainable and accurate design method for three profiles of the GFRP reinforced barrier wall and the barrier-deck joint to be adopted by bridge engineers in the future design of bridge barriers in Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".