Modelling criteria for r/c elements constructed with ultra‐high‐strength concrete and subjected to cyclic loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High‐strength concrete (HSC) has several benefits in high‐rise concrete buildings; however, its structural use in active seismic regions may be questioned due to the lower ductility of such concretes. In addition, seismic macro‐models being used currently are based on R/C elements constructed with normal‐strength concretes (f ≤ 40 MPa (5.8 ksi)). In this paper, the performance of plastic hinges in flexural elements constructed with a concrete strength up to 175 MPa (25.4 ksi) is investigated. In addition, other variables were studied such as the sectional reinforcement asymmetry, hinge shear strength and hinge shear demand. The seismic performance is presented in terms of stiffness deterioration, strength degradation, pinching phenomenon and displacement ductility. The requirements to implement the use of HSC in current macro‐models are examined. Current hysteretic models may be used to evaluate structural components constructed with higher concrete strength; however, the influence of concrete strength is controlled by the other test variables. Copyright © 2009 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".