ArticlePolymers2025
Comparison of Elastic Modulus Calculations in ASTM D7205 and CSA S806 for CFRP Rebar Under Elevated Temperature.
Article in Polymers, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, the elastic modulus of CFRP rebars under high-temperature conditions was evaluated in accordance with ASTM D7205 and CSA S806, and the differences between the two standards were compared and analyzed. CFRP rebars with diameters of 10 mm and 13 mm were tested, and tensile specimens were prepared following the procedures specified in both standards. Tensile tests were conducted at temperatures ranging from 25 °C to 650 °C using an electric furnace. Fracture morphology before and after testing, as well as microstructural changes, were examined through scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The results revealed that the ASTM standard determines the elastic modulus based on the initial linear portion of the stress-strain curve before the transition point, whereas the CSA standard includes the post-transition segment. At temperatures below 325 °C, the ASTM-derived modulus exhibited a lower coefficient of variation (COV) compared to the CSA-derived values, indicating a more stable performance. By applying the experimentally obtained modulus values to various prediction models, the model with the lowest average error was identified. These findings confirm that the elastic modulus of CFRP rebars can be reasonably predicted under elevated-temperature conditions using calibrated models.
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.