Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-storey reinforced concrete (RC) structural frames represent some of the most congested structural elements. Placing and consolidating concrete in such structural frames imposes substantial challenges. This offers a unique area of application for self-consolidating concrete (SCC) because of its inherent ability to flow under its own weight and fill congested sections, complicated formwork and hard-to-reach areas. Research is, however, needed to demonstrate the ability of SCC structural frames adequately to resist vertical and lateral loads. In the present study, full-scale 3 m high beam-column joints reinforced as per the Canadian Standards CSA A23·3-94 and ACI-352R-02 were made with normal concrete (NC) and SCC. They were tested under reversed cyclic loading applied at the beam tip and at a constant axial load applied on the column. The beam–column joint specimens were instrumented with linear variable displacement transducers and strain gauges to determine load–displacement traces, cumulative dissipated energy and secant stiffness. The current paper compares the performance of reinforced NC and SCC structural frames and discusses the potential use of SCC in such structural elements. Results indicate that reducing the coarse aggregate content in SCC mixtures can reduce the contribution of the aggregate interlock mechanism to total shear resistance, which leads to more rapid deterioration under cyclic loading. Further research is needed to ensure the safety of using low coarse aggregate content in SCC in highly seismic areas and assess the safety of already existing buildings cast using SCC.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".