Experimental investigation into the behaviour of continuous concrete beams reinforced with basalt FRP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The durability of reinforced concrete structures is an ongoing challenge for engineers, particularly in harsh environments such as industrial or marine settings. This paper is concerned with continuous concrete beams which are reinforced with basalt fibre reinforced polymer (BFRP) reinforcing bars, rather than traditional steel rebars, to improve the durability. Continuous concrete members are commonly used in bridges and carparks and therefore may be susceptible to corrosion by being a harsh environment or through exposure to de-icing salts. There are increasing levels of interest in structural solutions that offer durability as well as mechanical performance, and in this context, BFRP reinforcement can provide an effective, sustainable, and durable solution. This paper describes an experimental programme comprising four, two-span continuous reinforced concrete beams, containing BFRP rebars and stirrups. The test results are analysed in the paper, with particular focus given to the cracking behaviour, bending capacity, moment redistribution and deflections. The test results are compared with American and Canadian design codes. It is found that both design codes overestimate the cracking moment and sagging bending moment capacity but underestimate the deflections. Furthermore, this research found that BFRP RC continuous beams exhibited at least 20% moment redistribution. The findings from this research suggest that the RC continuous beams can be entirely reinforced with BFRP rebars and stirrups to achieve corrosion free concrete element.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".