Tension–Tension Fatigue Behavior of Ribbed Glass Fiber–Reinforced Polymer Bars in Air
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue resistance is a crucial aspect in the design of structural components subjected to cyclic loading. Due to the corrosion of steel reinforcement, glass fiber–reinforced polymer bars are increasingly being used in reinforced concrete members. However, very limited research has been conducted on the fatigue behavior of glass fiber–reinforced polymer reinforcement. This study builds upon previous fatigue test research performed at 4 Hz but also investigates low-frequency testing. Three adhesives were investigated to identify the optimal gripping system capable of withstanding fatigue loading. Nonshrink grout was determined to be the only suitable adhesive for avoiding unwanted failure modes. This study investigated stress levels ranging from 30% to 65% of the ultimate tensile strength depending on the frequency used. Tests at both frequencies yielded results within the expected S‒N curve, as in prior studies. Moreover, the equations of Sendeckyj showed good reliability of the data. Although North American codes limit fatigue cycle frequencies to between 1 and 15 Hz, this study found that the much lower-investigated frequencies of 0.03–0.04 Hz yielded excellent results within the expected behavior envelope. Low-frequency laboratory tests are advantageous to adopt because standard universal testing machines can be used, without the need for dynamic actuators.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".