ArticlePolymers2023
Fibre-Reinforced Polymers and Steel for the Reinforcement of Wooden Elements-Experimental and Numerical Analysis.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Composite Bars in Wooden, Full-Scale, Innovative Engineering Products-Experimental and Numerical Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Quantifying the Residual Stiffness of Concrete Beams with Polymeric Reinforcement under Repeated Loads.Polymers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
These elements are innovative and of interest to many researchers for the reinforcement of wooden elements. For the reinforced beam elements, the effect of the reinforcement factor, FRP and steel elastic modulus or FRP and steel arrangement of the reinforcement on the performance of the flexural elements was determined, followed by reading the load-displacement diagram of the reinforced beam elements. The finite element model was then developed and verified with the experimental results, which was mainly related to the fact that the general theory took into account the typical tensile failure mode, which can be used to predict the flexural strength of reinforced timber beams. From the tests, it was determined that reinforced timber beam elements had relatively ductile flexural strengths up to brittle tension for unreinforced elements. As for the reinforcements of FRP, the highest increase in load-bearing capacity was for carbon mats at 52.47%, with a reinforcement grade of 0.43%, while the lowest was for glass mats at 16.62% with a reinforcement grade of 0.22%. Basalt bars achieved the highest stiffness, followed by glass mats. Taking into account all the reinforcements used, the highest stiffness was demonstrated by the tests of the effectiveness of the reinforcement using 3 mm thick steel plates. For this configuration with a reinforcement percentage of 10%, this increase in load capacity was 79.48% and stiffness was 31.08%. The difference between the experimental and numerical results was within 3.62-27.36%, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.