Strengthening reinforced concrete column-slab connection using CFRP sheets.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the high cost of new construction and the increasing inventory of otherwise adequate structure, the need for repair, strengthening, or reinforced-concrete structures is growing significantly in Canada and worldwide. Fiber reinforced polymer technology has emerged during the past decade as a particular tool to upgrade existing structures. These materials are an excellent option for use as external reinforcing because of their light weight, resistance to corrosion, and high strength. This thesis introduces a strengthening technique of slab-column connection in flat-slab structures to enhance its flexural strength. Six flat-slab column connections were fabricated and then tested under increasing gravity loading up-to-complete collapse to investigate the effectiveness of using carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets in enhancing their flexural capacity. Each specimen comprised 2000 x 1000 x 150 mm slab, with a 200 x 200 mm column stub extending below and above the slab. The tested specimens consisted of two groups. The first group provided control specimens, on which three specimens had central column, edge column, and eccentric column, respectively. The second group was similar to the first group but with CFRP sheets installed around the column on the tension side of the slab. Different structural quantities were used to examine the contribution of CFRP sheets slab. Different structural quantities were used to examine the contribution of CFRP sheets to the flexural strength of the tested specimens. These structural quantities included deflections, concrete and steel strains, ultimate load carrying capacities and crack patterns. Results from testing showed that the ultimate load carrying capacity increased by 32, 38 and 65% for the tested specimens with central, eccentric, and edge column, respectively, when strengthened using CFRP sheets.Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .A26. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-01, page: 0261. Advisers: F. Ghrib; K. M. Sennah. Thesis (M.A.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".