Near-Field Explosion Effects on the Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Columns: A Numerical Investigation
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
The high incidence of global terrorism and accidental explosions have highlighted the vulnerability of built infrastructure to blast loading. Thus, owners of iconic structures are looking for ways to protect their critical assets from the effects of explosions. Many of the research efforts, in this light, have been devoted to the effects of far-field explosions on structural elements. The effects of near-field explosions on structural elements, especially columns, have not been as widely investigated. This paper presents the results of a comprehensive research program designed to investigate the effects of near-field explosions on the behaviour of reinforced concrete columns designed and detailed for regions of different levels of seismicity. The numerical study shows that reinforced concrete columns subjected to blast loading from higher explosive charge masses have higher deflections than those subjected to blast loading from lower charge masses, but at the same scaled distance. Also, the effect of closely spaced transverse reinforcement is significant at smaller scaled distances. Thus, reinforced concrete columns designed and detailed for areas of high seismicity have an inherently high blast resistance.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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