PBO-FRCM and CFRP strengthened reinforced concrete columns: In fire and post-fire behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper experimentally investigates the thermal response and post-fire structural behavior of seven short circular reinforced concrete columns. The variables include the type of strengthening system applied polypara-phenylene-benzo-bisthiazole (PBO) fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) and fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM), exposures (unexposed or fire-exposed), and using a cementitious-based Spray-applied Fire Resistive Materials (SFRM) insulation. Four columns were subjected to an ASTM E119 fire without any sustained load during the fire, while the other three columns were unexposed and served as controls. Two months after the fire test, fire-exposed columns were tested under axial loading and compared with unexposed ones. The steel rebar temperature in the insulated FRCM column remained below 150 °C for three hours, while this temperature was over 700 °C for the insulated CFRP-wrapped column. The post-fire axial tests indicated that the fire-exposed, insulated PBO-FRCM wrapped column retained a residual axial capacity of 92 %, significantly higher than the 21–66 % range observed in the other three columns. Considering reduced material properties, ACI code-based predictions for axial capacity showed reasonable accuracy with predicted-to-experimental ratios ranging from 0.86 to 1.16.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".