MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404009173 · doi:10.1061/jccof2.cceng-4835

Experimental Study on the Flexural Performance of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Beams with a Prefabricated Permanent UHPC Formwork

2024· article· en· W4404009173 on OpenAlexaff
Yanli Su, Jiaqi Shang, Chenhua Jin, Pu Zhang, Shamim A. Sheikh, Chang Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsHudbay Minerals (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormworkMaterials scienceFibre-reinforced plasticFlexural strengthStructural engineeringComposite materialReinforced concretePrecast concreteEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The flexural performance of concrete beams incorporating glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars and further strengthened by a prefabricated permanent ultrahigh-performance concrete (UHPC) formwork is investigated in this study. A total of eight beams, including seven composite beams with a UHPC formwork and one reference beam without a UHPC formwork, were tested under four-point bending. The parameters evaluated included the interface treatment method, the existence of a prefabricated permanent UHPC formwork, the presence of a top UHPC layer, and the GFRP reinforcement ratio. Experimental results revealed that the flexural capacity of beams with the UHPC formwork significantly improved relative to the reference beam. The maximum crack width of the composite beam was smaller than that of the reference beam under the same load. The addition of the top UHPC layer significantly increased the ultimate load of the composite beam, and the high tensile strength of the GFRP bar was effectively utilized. Moreover, characterization results revealed that interface treatment, specifically the addition of a linear low-density polyethylene bubble wrap interface, prevented debonding of the UHPC formwork from the concrete. A calculation model for flexural stiffness was also developed, which provided high predictive accuracy as verified by the close agreement of its results with experimental measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composites for ConstructionSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207