ArticlePolymers2024
Shear Capacity of Hollow High-Performance Concrete Beams with Cross-Wound Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper introduces cross-wound CFRP shear reinforcement of hollow HPC beams. The CFRP reinforcement was manufactured in the form of a square tubular mesh from carbon rovings oriented at ±45° from the longitudinal axis. The shear reinforcement was made in two variants from carbon yarns with linear densities of 1600 and 3700 tex. Tensile reinforcement made of BFRP bars was positioned directly around the hollow core and was used as a platform for manual winding of the shear reinforcement. The hollow beams were subjected to a three-point bending test with four configurations of the tensile BFRP reinforcement for better evaluation of the effect of the shear reinforcement under different conditions. The 1600 tex shear reinforcement increased the ultimate flexural strength by at least 89% compared to specimens without any shear reinforcement. The 3700 tex shear reinforcement yielded slightly better results in most cases but was not utilized to its full shear capacity as these specimens always failed in shear due to the delamination of the concrete matrix from the shear reinforcement. There was too much reinforcement in the beam cross-section.
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.