Shaking table test and numerical simulation of a 1/2‐scale self‐centering reinforced concrete frame
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Self‐centering reinforced concrete frames are developed as an alternative of traditional seismic force‐resisting systems with better seismic performance and re‐centering capability. This paper presents an experimental and computational study on the seismic performance of self‐centering reinforced concrete frames. A 1/2‐scale model of a two‐story self‐centering reinforced concrete frame model was designed and tested on the shaking table in State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering at Tongji University to evaluate the seismic behavior of the structure. A structural analysis model, including detailed modeling of beam–column joints, column–base joints, and prestressed tendons, was constructed in the nonlinear dynamic modeling software OpenSEES. Agreements between test results and numerical solutions indicate that the designed reinforced concrete frame has satisfactory seismic performance and self‐centering capacity subjected to earthquakes; the self‐centering structures can undergo large rocking with minor residual displacement after the earthquake excitations; the proposed analysis procedure can be applied in simulating the seismic performance of self‐centering reinforced concrete frames. To achieve a more comprehensive evaluation on the performance of self‐centering structures, research on energy dissipation devices in the system is expected. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it