Flexural strengthening of one-way reinforced concrete slabs using near surface-mounted BFRP bars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete (RC) one-way slabs strengthened with near-surface mounted (NSM) basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars. Ten RC slabs were subjected to four-point loading until failure. Various parameters including the steel reinforcement ratio (0.48and 0.95%), the NSM-BFRP reinforcement ratio (0.17, 0.25, and 0.35%), and two types of epoxy adhesives (Sikadur-30 and NSM-Gel) were investigated. The experimental results demonstrated the remarkable efficacy of the NSM-BFRP bars in enhancing the flexural performance of the strengthened slabs, especially those with lower steel reinforcement ratios. Compared to the control slabs, the ultimate loads were increased by 51‐123% and 21‐44% for slabs with 0.48 and 0.95% steel reinforcement ratios, respectively, while the ductility indices were increased by 10‐53% and 29‐79%. The type of the epoxy adhesive used had minimal impact on the flexural behavior of the strengthened slabs. Failure primarily occurred due to steel yielding followed by the rupture of the NSM-BFRP bars or by concrete crushing, depending on the reinforcement ratio provided. The cracking, yield, and ultimate loads of the strengthened slabs were predicted using the formulations of ACI 440.2R [3] guideline. Good agreement between the predicted and the experimental results were obtained, with ACI formulations being on the conservative side.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".