MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behaviour of glulam and CLT elements reinforced with CFRP

2025· article· en· W7117467780 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Gergi, Ghasan Doudak

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Structures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrofittingDuctility (Earth science)ReinforcementFibre-reinforced plasticSlabFinite element methodFlexural strengthTension (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The popularity of wood as a construction material has grown in recent decades due to considerations for sustainability as well as the increased availability of engineered wood products. To further enhance wood’s mechanical characteristics, attempts have been made to reinforce structural elements particularly on the tension side, where the failure is brittle. This study aims to investigate the impact of various retrofitting options on enhancing the overall behaviour of engineered wood products subjected to out of plane loading. An experimental program was developed to investigate the behaviour of 21 timber elements, comprising glulam and CLT members, with a focus on the flexural behaviour of elements with and without the effect of multi-directional FRP reinforcement. The results found that applying a tension laminate only was not effective due to premature detachment. Extending the reinforcement to the sides of the timber element in a U-shaped configuration provided a significant increase in strength. In general, the fabric consisting of bidirectional 0/90 fibers increased the peak strength, while fabric with bidirectional 45/45 enhanced the ductility of the retrofitted element. An analytical model based on a cross-sectional numerical analysis was developed and validated. It was shown that the model could predict the behaviour of retrofitted beams with reasonable accuracy. • 21 beams with outer vertical layers and consisting of two different lay-ups are tested. • The behaviour of multi-directional and partial reinforcement of CFRP fabrics is established. • Proposed analytical models are evaluated and successfully verified against data. • First study to investigate the effect of retrofitting CLT slab elements using CFRP fabric.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering StructuresSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207