Hybrid simulation testing of two-storey low-aspect-ratio nuclear RC shear walls with normal- and high-strength reinforcement: Seismic performance evaluation and economic assessment
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Low-aspect-ratio reinforced concrete (RC) shear walls have been commonly used in several nuclear facilities in containment and safety-related structures. Despite being a potential alternative to reduce rebar congestion and subsequently minimize complex construction activities typically associated with nuclear facilities, there has been limited experimental research on investigating the impact of using high-strength reinforcement (HSR) on the seismic performance of such walls, particularly in a multi-storey context. This lack of research is mainly due to considerable challenges imposed when testing such multi-storey nuclear RC shear walls in most laboratories. Therefore, the current study presents the experimental results of two two-storey low-aspect-ratio nuclear RC shear walls that were tested utilizing the seismic hybrid simulation testing technique. In this respect, walls W1-NSR and W2-HSR were designed using normal-strength reinforcement (NSR) and HSR, respectively, where the two test walls had comparable capacities to allow for direct comparisons. Both walls were subjected to various ground motion levels, spanning from operational to design and beyond-design earthquake scenarios. The experimental findings are then presented to include the force-displacement responses, the multi-storey effects, ductility capacities, lateral and rotational stiffnesses, rebar strains, and cracking patterns of the test walls. Subsequently, an economic assessment was carried out to quantify the total rebar weights and the corresponding construction costs of such walls. In addition, the expected seismic repair costs were determined based on a three-dimensional digital image correlation technique that provided information on the damage states of the test walls under different earthquake levels. The results show that although W1-NSR and W2-HSR attained similar force and moment capacities, W2-HSR achieved a relatively higher ductility capacity than W1-NSR. However, larger cracks were observed in W2-HSR compared to W1-NSR, which was attributed to the associated larger rebar spacing in the former relative to the latter. The economic assessment results demonstrate that using HSR minimized the rebar weights and construction costs, while both walls had similar seismic repair costs at their design and beyond-design earthquake levels. Both the seismic performance and economic assessment results presented in the current study are expected to aid future editions of relevant design standards in adopting HSR in nuclear construction practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».