INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT OF CFRP-CONCRETE INTERFACE ON EXTERNALLY STRENGTHENED BRIDGE DIAPHRAGMS USING DIRECT TENSION PULL-OFF TEST
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In service, externally bonded CFRP materials may be exposed to fluctuating moisture levels and harsh temperature cycles, which can potentially reduce their durability and degrade the CFRP-concrete bond. This bond interface is the most critical parameter in the structural evaluation of CFRP retrofitted bridges. Full interfacial assessment of the bond behaviour for structural performance evaluation should include the identification of defects, estimation of defect size, the potential effects on structural behaviour, and continuous monitoring of the evolution of the defects over time. In this paper, 490 pull-off tests were conducted following ASTM D7522 to investigate the integrity and variability of the bond strength of the CFRP-concrete interface for an externally strengthened diaphragm from a Canadian bridge having two to four layers of CFRP strips in a bond critical application. The bond strength values, which ranged from 0.66 MPa to 5.54 MPa, generally confirmed the results of non-destructive testing, including acoustic sounding and infrared thermography which aimed to locate hidden defects behind the strengthening layers. Bond strength and failure modes of both defective and defect-free regions are critically analyzed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".