Structural Behavior of Full-Depth Deck Panels Having Developed Closure Strips Reinforced with GFRP Bars and Filled with UHPFRC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adoption of prefabricated elements and systems (PBES) in accelerating bridge construction (ABC) and rapidly replacing aging infrastructure has attracted considerable attention from bridge authorities. These prefabricated components facilitate quick assembly, which diminishes the environmental footprint at the construction site, alleviates delays and lane closures, reduces disruption for the traveling public, and ultimately conserves both time and taxpayer resources. The current paper explores the structural behavior of a reinforced concrete (RC) precast full-depth deck panel (FDDP) having 175 mm projected glass-fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars embedded into a 200 mm wide closure strip filled with ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC). Three joint details for moment-resisting connections (MRCs), named the angle joint, C-joint, and zigzag joint, were constructed and loaded to collapse. The controlled slabs and mid-span-connected precast FDDPs were statically loaded to collapse under concentric or eccentric wheel loading. The moment capacity of the controlled slab reinforced with GFRP bars compared with the concrete slab reinforced with steel reinforcing bars was less than 15% for the same reinforcement ratio. The precast FDDPs showed very similar results to those of the controlled slab reinforced with GFRP bars. The RC slab reinforced by steel reinforcing bars failed in the flexural mode, while the slab reinforced by GFRP bars failed in flexural-shear one.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".