Non-linear model for reinforced concrete under cyclic loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the available shear models for reinforced concrete rely on empirical formulations. In this study, a rational shear stress function is used to define the shear stress–strain envelope for reinforced concrete. Cyclic rules are proposed to define the loading, unloading and reloading relationships for reinforced concrete under shear stress reversals. A normal stress function describing the cyclic relationship of concrete under axial stress is also introduced. The proposed functions are verified using experimental data of reinforced concrete panels tested under monotonic and cyclic loading. Subsequently, the normal and shear stress functions along with their cyclic rules are integrated in a non-linear finite element analysis code. The resulting model accounts for tension stiffening, crack opening and closing, compression hardening and softening, degradation of concrete strength and stiffness in the direction parallel to the crack, compression unloading and reloading, as well as non-linear steel behaviour (strain hardening and Bauschinger effect). The finite element model is then used to analyse two Portland Cement Association shear walls with different geometries tested under cyclic loading. The results show a good agreement between analytical and experimental data. The model showed an excellent capacity of predicting shear deformations of reinforced concrete elements under cyclic loading with minimal computational efforts.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".