Seismic Behavior of GFRP-RC Circular Bridge Columns under Eccentric Lateral Cyclic Loading: Influence of Transverse Reinforcement Ratio and Configuration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on evaluating the confinement requirements for glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcement in circular reinforced concrete (RC) columns subjected to seismic forces, including torsional effects. Seven large-scale GFRP-RC columns were tested under axial and quasi-static cyclic lateral loading. The test parameters included torsion-to-bending moment ratio (tm) and transverse reinforcement spacing and configuration (spiral and hoops). The experimental results revealed that introducing torsion to the loading scheme reduced the lateral load resistance and drift capacity of the columns. The study recommends adopting a spiral pitch equal to one-sixth of the effective core diameter, as per the Canadian provisions for FRP-RC structures. This spiral pitch significantly enhanced peak lateral load, torque, drift, and twist capacities while ensuring column stability at high drift ratios and preventing complex modes of failure under seismic loading, including torsion. The GFRP spirally reinforced columns consistently surpassed the drift threshold requirements specified by the Canadian provisions for FRP-RC structures. In contrast, hoop-reinforced columns failed at lower drifts, with a notable lap-splice failure observed in columns under tm of 0.4. It was concluded that using GFRP hoops with a lap splice length of 40 times the bar diameter is inadequate for columns subjected to seismic conditions with torsional effects.
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 | 0.000 | 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".