MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412754693 · doi:10.11159/iccste25.401

FRP for Sustainable, Resilient, and Seismically Resistant Concrete Structures

2025· article· en· W4412754693 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Shamim A. Sheikh, J H Na

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringForensic engineeringMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research, underway at the University of Toronto, investigates FRP-reinforced concrete structures under extreme environments and extreme loads such as seismic to establish robust design guidelines.This article summarizes the performance of FRP and FRP-reinforced concrete structures under extreme weather conditions, addressing durability concerns exacerbated by climate change.FRP composites, including bars and sheets, offer corrosion resistance, lightweight properties, and high strength-to-weight ratios, making them viable alternatives to steel reinforcement.However, their susceptibility to degradation under extreme temperatures necessitated rigorous evaluation.A multi-phase experimental and analytical research program was conducted, encompassing tensile tests, bond assessments, beam analyses, and FRP-wrapped cylinder studies under varied thermal and environmental conditions.Test results revealed critical insights: FRP sheets exhibited a 30-40% bond strength reduction at 60°C (exceeding resin glass transition temperatures), while GFRP bars experienced up to 26% bond strength loss after prolonged 80°C exposure.Over-reinforced beams, aligned with Canadian design codes (CSA S806-12/S6-19), demonstrated minimal strength degradation (≤5%) under thermal conditioning, underscoring the importance of design philosophy.Externally FRP-wrapped shear-critical beams showed enhanced strength (up to 112% for GFRP and 96% for CFRP under ambient conditions), though elevated temperatures reduced effectiveness by 10-20%.FRP confinement improved concrete cylinder ductility by 600%-700%, yet epoxy softening at 60°C diminished strength gains by 15% to 53%.Freeze-thaw cycles had a negligible impact on FRP-wrapped specimens.Analytical efforts yielded empirical models predicting GFRP bar tensile strength decay at elevated temperatures and theoretical models for the shear capacity of FRP-reinforced beams, validated with experimental data (average predicted-to-test ratios of 0.96-1.00).The findings summarized in this article advocate for revised code provisions to account for temperature-dependent FRP performance, ensuring sustainable, resilient infrastructure.By integrating material behaviour, structural response, and environmental effects, this research advances FRP applications in climate-adaptive construction.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207