MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409718532 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2024-0254

Finite element modeling of mixed adhesive layer fracture mode for FRP web strengthening of steel bridges

2025· article· en· W4409718532 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayman M. Okeil, Tuna Ülger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation
KeywordsFinite element methodFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringAdhesiveMaterials scienceFracture (geology)Mode (computer interface)Layer (electronics)Composite materialMixed modeEngineeringForensic engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buckling of thin-walled web plates of steel girders can be delayed using bonded glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) stiffeners using the strengthening-by-stiffening (SBS) strengthening technique. The stress state between the bonded adherents (steel web and GFRP stiffener) is complex, varies greatly pre- and post-buckling, and causes adhesion- and/or cohesion-dominant failure modes. Full-scale experiments of SBS-strengthened steel beams showed a need to investigate the fracture mode of the adhesive layer. A finite element model of the full-scale beams was built to study the adhesive layer using sub-modeling techniques considering different steel plate thicknesses, epoxy types, and initial crack to determine the phase angle shift during web buckling. It was observed that the SBS failure is controlled by a mixed mode that starts initially with a phase angle of 29°; i.e., Mode II is the dominant failure mode during the linear phase. Thereafter, Mode I with a 59° phase angle became prevalent during the nonlinear phase of the behavior implying that the buckling-driven failure of web plate changes the phase angle.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete→French-language works237,207→