Investigating the Behaviour and Strength of Unbonded Pre-tensioned RC Slabs Subject to Flexural Loads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unbonded pre-tensioned systems, in which tendons are greased and wrapped in plastic sheathing, have several benefits in comparison to bonded systems. However, analytical evaluation of their capacity is taxing due to the iterative compatibility conditions necessary to determine the system’s behavior using the empirical equations available in the literature. To investigate the behaviour and strength of unbonded pre-tensioned RC slabs subject to flexural loads, four simply-supported post-tensioned slabs with unbonded tendons were tested in flexure. Experimental failure loads and tendon strains were compared to the ACI 318-19 provisions. While the provisions for unbonded specimens were found to be accurate, the strain in the unbonded tendons exceeded the yield stress in all specimens, suggesting that ACI 318-19’s stress limitations on unbonded post-tensioned concrete are unwarranted. The unbonded system also showed better crack control at the failure stage when non-prestressing steel reinforcement is used when compared to system with no non-prestressing steel.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".