Experimental Study on the Flexural Performance of GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Beams with a Prefabricated Permanent UHPC Formwork
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".