Retrofitting of Box Section Concrete Beams to Resist Shear and Torsion Using Near-Surface-Mount (NSM) GFRP Stirrups
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are a few kinds of research about box section Reinforced Concrete (RC) beams under the effect of combined shear and torsional stresses. In the present research, the concept of adding external strengthening, in the transverse direction, is adopted. The paper focuses on using Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymer GFRP ropes as near-surface mount stirrups. Nine box-section concrete specimens were decanted and tested. Three variables are adopted, (1) GFRP stirrups diameter, (2) GFRP stirrups inclination, and (3) GFRP stirrups spacing. The experimental results showed considerable enhancement in the shear capacity of the strengthened beams by 8 to 56% depending on the effectiveness of the studied parameters. Ductility and toughness were improved when more intensive strengthening schemes were adopted. The shear capacity of all tested beams based on Egyptian code ECP 208–2019 is calculated and compared with that from American code ACI 440–2019 and Canadian code CSA-A23.3-04. The shear capacity from both Egyptian and American codes compared with experimental loads. The analytical results are conservative in some cases and unconservative in others while the analytical results in general are conservative. The Canadian code CSA-A23.3-04 is unconservative compared to the experimental results for the range of the studied parameters and specimens.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it