MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408385028 · doi:10.1002/suco.202401229

Experimental capacity of <scp>TL</scp> ‐4 concrete barrier–deck connection using <scp>GFRP</scp> ‐bars with reduced‐radius 180° hooks and adhesive <scp>GFRP</scp> anchors

2025· article· en· W4408385028 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Rostami, Khaled Sennah, Hamdy M. Afefy

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Concrete · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticAdhesiveRADIUSConnection (principal bundle)Structural engineeringDeckMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineeringComputer scienceLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper summarizes the experimental results performed on the TL‐4 bridge barrier, aiming to establish a cost‐effective detailing approach using glass fiber‐reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars for sustainable construction practices. The design used GFRP‐HM M13 bars as the main and secondary reinforcement for the TL‐4 barrier wall. Additionally, it featured newly developed GFRP bars with a 180° hook at the junction between the barrier and the deck. The experimental program was designed to validate the barrier's design and findings by comparing them with the factored applied moments outlined in the literature and the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) for the barrier–deck junction under simulated vehicle impact conditions. The program involved testing four full‐scale TL‐4 barrier specimens, each measuring 900 mm in length, to failure to assess their ultimate load‐carrying capacities and failure modes at the deck‐barrier joint. Two specimens represented barriers constructed for a slab‐on‐girder bridge system, while the other two were designed to rest on a non‐deformable deck slab, applicable to both new constructions and the replacement of deteriorated barriers in existing bridges. A correlation analysis was performed between the experimental results and the factored applied moments derived from CHBDC, corresponding to equivalent vehicle impact forces obtained through finite‐element modeling of the barrier–deck system. Recommendations for implementing the proposed design of the TL‐4 bridge barrier in highway bridges are provided. Pullout tests were conducted on #4 and #5 GFRP bars with reduced‐radius 180° hooks embedded in concrete blocks to determine the hook strength. Comparing the results with those obtained from the barrier testing showed that concrete breakout or diagonal tension cracking at the barrier–deck connection occurs before hook breakage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural ConcreteSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207