MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983791904

Numerical Evaluation of Structural Behavior of the Simply Supported FRP-RC Beams

2012· article· en· W6983791904 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcementCorrosionFibre-reinforced plasticDeflection (physics)Reinforced solidProperties of concreteReinforced concreteFinite element methodPlasticityCompressive strength
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main problem of steel-reinforced concrete structures is corrosion of steel reinforcements which leads to premature failure of concrete structures. This problem costs a lot annually to rehabilitate and repair concrete structures. In order to improve the long-term performance of reinforced concrete structures and for preventing this corrosion problem, conventional steel bars in concrete can be substituted by Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) bars. In this study the structural behavior and performance of the simply supported concrete beams reinforced with the FRP bars are numerically evaluated and compared with the conventionally steel-reinforced concrete beams. The commercial Finite Element program, ABAQUS, was used for this purpose and the ability of the Concrete Damage Plasticity constitutive model for concrete was investigated for modeling the non-linear behavior and fracture of the concrete material. Two different cases were considered for evaluating the structural behavior of FRP-reinforced concrete beams; case (a) effect of different types and ratios of reinforcements, and case (b) effect of different concrete qualities. For the first case, different reinforcement types (i.e., CFRP, GFRP, AFRP and steel bars) and various reinforcement ratios were considered and the concrete material assumed to be of normal strength quality (NSC). For the second case, it was assumed that the concrete for all the FE models has high strength quality (HSC) and hence, for comparing the results of the HSC and NSC models, the mechanical properties of the reinforcements were considered to be identical as the first case. The results of modeling are presented in terms of; moment vs. mid-span deflection curves, compressive strain in the outer fiber of concrete, tensile strain in the lower tensile reinforcement, cracking and ultimate moments, service and ultimate deflections, deformability factor and mode of failure. Finally, the results of simulations are compared with predictions of several design models including ISIS Canada Model, ACI 440-H and CSA S806-02 standards.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207